A theory of natural philosophy

LIBRARY

CWWVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
DAVIS

TH E O R I A

PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS

REDACTA AD UNICAM LEGEM VIRIUM
IN NATURA EXISTENTIUM,

A V C T O

P^ROGERIO JOSEPHO BOSCOVICH

SOCIETATIS J £ S U,
NUNC AB IPSO PERPOLITA, ET AUCTA,

Ac a plurimis praeccclcntium edifionum
mendis expurgata.

EDITIO VENETA PR1MA

IPSO «fUCTORE PRJESENTE, ET CORRIGENTE.

V E N E T I I S,

MDCCLXIII.

» ^> M «?> «4 «ft •*»<?> «4 V0> «» <«k «» v«» *» «^» «

Ex TTPOCRAPHIA REMOWDINIANA.
r^IO^Z/M PZllMII.yi/, ac P R IV 1LE G 1 0,

A THEORY OF

NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

PUT FORWARD AND EXPLAINED BY

ROGER JOSEPH BOSCOVICH, S.J.

LATIN— ENGLISH EDITION

FROM THE TEXT OF THE

FIRST VENETIAN EDITION

PUBLISHED UNDER THE PERSONAL

SUPERINTENDENCE OF THE AUTHOR

IN 1763

WITH

A SHORT LIFE OF BOSCOVICH

CHICAGO LONDON

OPEN COURT PUBLISHING COMPANY

1922

LIBRARY

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
DAVIS

PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN

BY

BUTLER & TANNER, FROME, ENGLAND

Copyright

PREFACE

HE text presented in this volume is that of the Venetian edition of 1763.
This edition was chosen in preference to the first edition of 1758, published
at Vienna, because, as stated on the title-page, it was the first edition (revised
and enlarged) issued under the personal superintendence of the author.

In the English translation, an endeavour has been made to adhere as
closely as possible to a literal rendering of the Latin ; except that the some-
what lengthy and complicated sentences have been broken up. This has
made necessary slight changes of meaning in several of the connecting words. This will be
noted especially with regard to the word " adeoque ", which Boscovich uses with a variety
of shades of meaning, from " indeed ", " also " or " further ", through " thus ", to a decided
" therefore ", which would have been more correctly rendered by " ideoque ". There is
only one phrase in English that can also take these various shades of meaning, viz., " and so " ;
and this phrase, for the use of which there is some justification in the word " adeo " itself,
has been usually employed.

The punctuation of the Latin is that of the author. It is often misleading to a modern
reader and even irrational ; but to have recast it would have been an onerous task and
something characteristic of the author and his century would have been lost.

My translation has had the advantage of a revision by Mr. A. O. Prickard, M.A., Fellow
of New College, Oxford, whose task has been very onerous, for he has had to watch not
only for flaws in the translation, but also for misprints in the Latin. These were necessarily
many ; in the first place, there was only one original copy available, kindly loaned to me by
the authorities of the Cambridge University Library ; and, as this copy could not leave
my charge, a type-script had to be prepared from which the compositor worked, thus doub-
ling the chance of error. Secondly, there were a large number of misprints, and even
omissions of important words, in the original itself ; for this no discredit can be assigned to
Boscovich ; for, in the printer's preface, we read that four presses were working at the
same time in order to take advantage of the author's temporary presence in Venice. Further,
owing to almost insurmountable difficulties, there have been many delays in the production
of the present edition, causing breaks of continuity in the work of the translator and reviser ;
which have not conduced to success. We trust, however, that no really serious faults remain.
The short life of Boscovich, which follows next after this preface, has been written by
Dr. Branislav Petronievic, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Belgrade. It is to
be regretted that, owing to want of space requiring the omission of several addenda to the
text of the Theoria itself, a large amount of interesting material collected by Professor
Petronievic has had to be left out.

The financial support necessary for the production of such a costly edition as the present
has been met mainly by the Government of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes ;
and the subsidiary expenses by some Jugo-Slavs interested in the publication.

After the " Life," there follows an " Introduction," in which I have discussed the ideas
of Boscovich, as far as they may be gathered from the text of the Tbeoria alone ; this
also has been cut down, those parts which are clearly presented to the reader in Boscovich's
own Synopsis having been omitted. It is a matter of profound regret to everyone that this
discussion comes from my pen instead of, as was originally arranged, from that of the late
Philip E. P. Jourdain, the well-known mathematical logician ; whose untimely death threw
into my far less capable hands the responsible duties of editorship.

I desire to thank the authorities of the Cambridge University Library, who time after
time over a period of five years have forwarded to me the original text of this work of
Boscovich. Great credit is also due to the staff of Messrs. Butler & Tanner, Frome,
for the care and skill with which they have carried out their share of the work ; and
my special thanks for the unfailing painstaking courtesy accorded to my demands, which were
frequently not in agreement with trade custom.

J. M. CHILD.
MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY,

December, 1921.

LIFE OF ROGER JOSEPH BOSCOVICH

By BRANISLAV PETRONIEVIC'

]HE Slav world, being still in its infancy, has, despite a considerable number
of scientific men, been unable to contribute as largely to general science
as the other great European nations. It has, nevertheless, demonstrated
its capacity of producing scientific works of the highest value. Above
all, as I have elsewhere indicated," it possesses Copernicus, Lobachevski,
Mendeljev, and Boscovich.

In the following article, I propose to describe briefly the life of the
Jugo-Slav, Boscovich, whose principal work is here published for the sixth time ; the first
edition having appeared in 1758, and others in 1759, 1763, 1764, and 1765. The present
text is from the edition of 1763, the first Venetian edition, revised and enlarged.

On his father's side, the family of Boscovich is of purely Serbian origin, his grandfather,
Bosko, having been an orthodox Serbian peasant of the village of Orakova in Herzegovina.
His father, Nikola, was first a merchant in Novi Pazar (Old Serbia), but later settled in
Dubrovnik (Ragusa, the famous republic in Southern Dalmatia), whither his father, Bosko,
soon followed him, and where Nikola became a Roman Catholic. Pavica, Boscovich's
mother, belonged to the Italian family of Betere, which for a century had been established
in Dubrovnik and had become Slavonicized — Bara Betere, Pavica's father, having been a
poet of some reputation in Ragusa.

Roger Joseph Boscovich (Rudjer Josif Boskovic', in Serbo-Croatian) was born at Ragusa
on September i8th, 1711, and was one of the younger members of a large family. He
received his primary and secondary education at the Jesuit College of his native town ;
in 1725 he became a member of the Jesuit order and was sent to Rome, where from 1728
to 1733 he studied philosophy, physics and mathematics in the Collegium Romanum.
From 1733 to 1738 he taught rhetoric and grammar in various Jesuit schools ; he became
Professor of mathematics in the Collegium Romanum, continuing at the same time his
studies in theology, until in 1744 he became a priest and a member of his order.

In 1736, Boscovich began his literary activity with the first fragment, " De Maculis
Solaribus," of a scientific poem, " De Solis ac Lunse Defectibus " ; and almost every
succeeding year he published at least one treatise upon some scientific or philosophic problem.
His reputation as a mathematician was already established when he was commissioned by
Pope Benedict XIV to examine with two other mathematicians the causes of the weakness
in the cupola of St. Peter's at Rome. Shortly after, the same Pope commissioned him to
consider various other problems, such as the drainage of the Pontine marshes, the regulariza-
tion of the Tiber, and so on. In 1756, he was sent by the republic of Lucca to Vienna
as arbiter in a dispute between Lucca and Tuscany. During this stay in Vienna, Boscovich
was commanded by the Empress Maria Theresa to examine the building of the Imperial
Library at Vienna and the cupola of the cathedral at Milan. But this stay in Vienna,
which lasted until 1758, had still more important consequences ; for Boscovich found
time there to finish his principal work, Theoria Philosophies Naturalis ; the publication
was entrusted to a Jesuit, Father Scherffer, Boscovich having to leave Vienna, and the
first edition appeared in 1758, followed by a second edition in the following year. With
both of these editions, Boscovich was to some extent dissatisfied (see the remarks made
by the printer who carried out the third edition at Venice, given in this volume on page 3) ;
so a third edition was issued at Venice, revised, enlarged and rearranged under the author's
personal superintendence in 1763. The revision was so extensive that as the printer
remarks, " it ought to be considered in some measure as a first and original edition " ;
and as such it has been taken as the basis of the translation now published. The fourth
and fifth editions followed in 1764 and 1765.

One of the most important tasks which Boscovich was commissioned to undertake
was that of measuring an arc of the meridian in the Papal States. Boscovich had designed
to take part in a Portuguese expedition to Brazil on a similar errand ; but he was per-

" Slav Achievements in Advanced Science, London, 1917.

vii

viii A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

suaded by Pope Benedict XIV, in 1750, to conduct, in collaboration with an English Jesuit,
Christopher Maire, the measurements in Italy. The results of their work were published,
in 1755, by Boscovich, in a treatise, De Litter aria Expedition^ -per Pontificiam, &c. ; this
was translated into French under the title of Voyage astronomique et geograpbique dans
VEtat de VEglise, in 1770.

By the numerous scientific treatises and dissertations which he had published up to
1759, and by his principal work, Boscovich had acquired so high a reputation in Italy, nay
in Europe at large, that the membership of numerous academies and learned societies had
already been conferred upon him. In 1760, Boscovich, who hitherto had been bound to
Italy by his professorship at Rome, decided to leave that country. In this year we find
him at Paris, where he had gone as the travelling companion of the Marquis Romagnosi.
Although in the previous year the Jesuit order had been expelled from France, Boscovich
had been received on the strength of his great scientific reputation. Despite this, he did not
feel easy in Paris ; and the same year we find him in London, on a mission to vindicate
the character of his native place, the suspicions of the British Government, that Ragusa was
being used by France to fit out ships of war, having been aroused ; this mission he carried
out successfully. In London he was warmly welcomed, and was made a member of the
Royal Society. Here he published his work, De Solis ac Lunce defectibus, dedicating it to
the Royal Society. Later, he was commissioned by the Royal Society to proceed to Cali-
fornia to observe the transit of Venus ; but, as he was unwilling to go, the Society sent
him to Constantinople for the same purpose. He did not, however, arrive in time to
make the observation ; and, when he did arrive, he fell ill and was forced to remain at
Constantinople for seven months. He left that city in company with the English ambas-
sador, Porter, and, after a journey through Thrace, Bulgaria, and Moldavia, he arrived
finally at Warsaw, in Poland ; here he remained for a time as the guest of the family of
PoniatowsM. In 1762, he returned from Warsaw to Rome by way of Silesia and Austria.
The first part of this long journey has been described by Boscovich himself in his Giornale
di un viaggio da Constantinopoli in Polonia — the original of which was not published until
1784, although a French translation had appeared in 1772, and a German translation
in 1779.

Shortly after his return to Rome, Boscovich was appointed to a chair at the University
of Pavia ; but his stay there was not of long duration. Already, in 1764, the building
of the observatory of Brera had been begun at Milan according to the plans of Boscovich ;
and in 1770, Boscovich was appointed its director. Unfortunately, only two years later
he was deprived of office by the Austrian Government which, in a controversy between
Boscovich and another astronomer of the observatory, the Jesuit Lagrange, took the part
of his opponent. The position of Boscovich was still further complicated by the disbanding
of his company ; for, by the decree of Clement V, the Order of Jesus had been suppressed in
1773. In the same year Boscovich, now free for the second time, again visited Paris, where
he was cordially received in official circles. The French Government appointed him director
of " Optique Marine," with an annual salary of 8,000 francs ; and Boscovich became a
French subject. But, as an ex- Jesuit, he was not welcomed in all scientific circles. The
celebrated d'Alembert was his declared enemy ; on the other hand, the famous astronomer,
Lalande, was his devoted friend and admirer. Particularly, in his controversy with Rochon
on the priority of the discovery of the micrometer, and again in the dispute with Laplace
about priority in the invention of a method for determining the orbits of comets, did
the enmity felt in these scientific circles show itself. In Paris, in 1779, Boscovich
published a new edition of his poem on eclipses, translated into French and annotated,
under the title, Les Eclipses, dedicating the edition to the King, Louis XV.

During this second stay in Paris, Boscovich had prepared a whole series of new works,
which he hoped would have been published at the Royal Press. But, as the American
War of Independence was imminent, he was forced, in 1782, to take two years' leave of
absence, and return to Italy. He went to the house of his publisher at Bassano ; and here,
in 1 785^ were published five volumes of his optical and astronomical works, Opera pertinentia
ad opticam et astronomiam.

Boscovich had planned to return through Italy from Bassano to Paris ; indeed, he left
Bassano for Venice, Rome, Florence, and came to Milan. Here he was detained by illness
and he was obliged to ask the French Government to extend his leave, a request that was
willingly granted. His health, however, became worse ; and to it was added a melancholia.
He died on February I3th, 1787.

The great loss which Science sustained by his death has been fitly commemorated in
the eulogium by his friend Lalande in the French Academy, of which he was a member ;
and also in that of Francesco Ricca at Milan, and so on. But it is his native town, his
beloved Ragusa, which has most fitly celebrated the death of the greatest of her sons

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY ix

in the eulogium of the poet, Bernardo Zamagna. " This magnificent tribute from his native
town was entirely deserved by Boscovich, both for his scientific works, and for his love and
work for his country.

Boscovich had left his native country when a boy, and returned to it only once after-
wards, when, in 1747, he passed the summer there, from June 20th to October 1st ; but
he often intended to return. In a letter, dated May 3rd, 1774, he seeks to secure a pension
as a member of the Jesuit College of Ragusa ; he writes : " I always hope at last to find
my true peace in my own country and, if God permit me, to pass my old age there in
quietness."

Although Boscovich has written nothing in his own language, he understood it per-
fectly ; as is shown by the correspondence with his sister, by certain passages in his Italian
letters, and also by his Giornale (p. 31 ; p. 59 of the French edition). In a dispute with
d'Alembert, who had called him an Italian, he said : " we will notice here in the first place
that our author is a Dalmatian, and from Ragusa, not Italian ; and that is the reason why
Marucelli, in a recent work on Italian authors, has made no mention of him." * That his
feeling of Slav nationality was strong is proved by the tributes he pays to his native town
and native land in his dedicatory epistle to Louis XV.

Boscovich was at once philosopher, astronomer, physicist, mathematician, historian,
engineer, architect, and poet. In addition, he was a diplomatist and a man of the world ;
and yet a good Catholic and a devoted member of the Jesuit order. His friend, Lalande,
has thus sketched his appearance and his character : " Father Boscovich was of great
stature ; he had a noble expression, and his disposition was obliging. He accommodated
himself with ease to the foibles of the great, with whom he came into frequent contact.
But his temper was a trifle hasty and irascible, even to his friends — at least his manner
gave that impression — but this solitary defect was compensated by all those qualities which
make up a great man. . . . He possessed so strong a constitution that it seemed likely that
he would have lived much longer than he actually did ; but his appetite was large, and his
belief in the strength of his constitution hindered him from paying sufficient attention
to the danger which always results from this." From other sources we learn that Boscovich
had only one meal daily, dejeuner.

Of his ability as a poet, Lalande says : " He was himself a poet like his brother, who was
also a Jesuit. . . . Boscovich wrote verse in Latin only, but he composed with extreme ease.
He hardly ever found himself in company without dashing off some impromptu verses to
well-known men or charming women. To the latter he paid no other attentions, for his
austerity was always exemplary. . . . With such talents, it is not to be wondered at that
he was everywhere appreciated and sought after. Ministers, princes and sovereigns all
received him with the greatest distinction. M. de Lalande witnessed this in every part
of Italy where Boscovich accompanied him in 1765."

Boscovich was acquainted with several languages — Latin, Italian, French, as well as
his native Serbo-Croatian, which, despite his long absence from his country, he did not
forget. Although he had studied in Italy and passed the greater part of his life there,
he had never penetrated to the spirit of the language, as his Italian biographer, Ricca, notices.
His command of French was even more defective ; but in spite of this fact, French men
of science urged him to write in French. English he did not understand, as he confessed
in a letter to Priestley ; although he had picked up some words of polite conversation
during his stay in London.

His correspondence was extensive. The greater part of it has been published in
the Memoirs de VAcademie Jougo-Slave of Zagrab, 1887 to 1912.

" Oratio in funere R. J. Boscovichii ... a Bernardo Zamagna.

* Voyage Astronomique, p. 750 ; also on pp. 707 seq.

• Journal des Sfavans, Fevrier, 1792, pp. 113-118.

INTRODUCTION

ALTHOUGH the title to this work to a very large extent correctly describes
the contents, yet the argument leans less towards the explanation of a
theory than it does towards the logical exposition of the results that must
follow from the acceptance of certain fundamental assumptions, more or
less generally admitted by natural philosophers of the time. The most
important of these assumptions is the doctrine of Continuity, as enunciated
by Leibniz. This doctrine may be shortly stated in the words : " Every-
thing takes place by degrees " ; or, in the phrase usually employed by Boscovich : " Nothing
happens -per saltum." The second assumption is the axiom of Impenetrability ; that is to
say, Boscovich admits as axiomatic that no two material points can occupy the same spatial,
or local, point simultaneously. Clerk Maxwell has characterized this assumption as " an
unwarrantable concession to the vulgar opinion." He considered that this axiom is a
prejudice, or prejudgment, founded on experience of bodies of sensible size. This opinion
of Maxwell cannot however be accepted without dissection into two main heads. The
criticism of the axiom itself would appear to carry greater weight against Boscovich than
against other philosophers ; but the assertion that it is a prejudice is hardly warranted.
For, Boscovich, in accepting the truth of the axiom, has no experience on which to found his
acceptance. His material points have absolutely no magnitude ; they are Euclidean points,
" having no parts." There is, therefore, no reason for assuming, by a sort of induction (and
Boscovich never makes an induction without expressing the reason why such induction can
be made), that two material points cannot occupy the same local point simultaneously ;
that is to say, there cannot have been a prejudice in favour of the acceptance of this axiom,
derived from experience of bodies of sensible size ; for, since the material points are non-
extended, they do not occupy space, and cannot therefore exclude another point from
occupying the same space. Perhaps, we should say the reason is not the same as that which
makes it impossible for bodies of sensible size. The acceptance of the axiom by Boscovich is
purely theoretical ; in fact, it constitutes practically the whole of the theory of Boscovich. On
the other hand, for this very reason, there are no readily apparent grounds for the acceptance
of the axiom ; and no serious arguments can be adduced in its favour ; Boscovich 's own
line of argument, founded on the idea that infinite improbability comes to the same thing
as impossibility, is given in Art. 361. Later, I will suggest the probable source from which
Boscovich derived his idea of impenetrability as applying to points of matter, as distinct
from impenetrability for bodies of sensible size.

Boscovich's own idea of the merit of his work seems to have been chiefly that it met the
requirements which, in the opinion of Newton, would constitute " a mighty advance in
philosophy." These requirements were the " derivation, from the phenomena of Nature,
of two or three general principles ; and the explanation of the manner in which the properties
and actions of all corporeal things follow from these principles, even if the causes of those
principles had not at the time been discovered." Boscovich claims in his preface to the
first edition (Vienna, 1758) that he has gone far beyond these requirements ; in that he has
reduced all the principles of Newton to a single principle — namely, that given by his Law
of Forces.

The occasion that led to the writing of this work was a request, made by Father Scherffer,
who eventually took charge of the first Vienna edition during the absence of Boscovich ; he
suggested to Boscovich the investigation of the centre of oscillation. Boscovich applied to
this investigation the principles which, as he himself states, " he lit upon so far back as the
year 1745." Of these principles he had already given some indication in the dissertations
De Viribus vivis (published in 1745), De Lege Firium in Natura existentium (1755), and
others. While engaged on the former dissertation, he investigated the production and
destruction of velocity in the case of impulsive action, such as occurs in direct collision.
In this, where it is to be noted that bodies of sensible size are under consideration, Boscovich
was led to the study of the distortion and recovery of shape which occurs on impact ; he
came to the conclusion that, owing to this distortion and recovery of shape, there was
produced by the impact a continuous retardation of the relative velocity during the whole
time of impact, which was finite ; in other words, the Law of Continuity, as enunciated by

XI

xii INTRODUCTION

Leibniz, was observed. It would appear that at this time (1745) Boscovich was concerned
mainly, if not solely, with the facts of the change of velocity, and not with the causes for
this change. The title of the dissertation, De Firibus vivis, shows however that a secondary
consideration, of almost equal importance in the development of the Theory of Boscovich,
also held the field. The natural philosophy of Leibniz postulated monads, without parts,
extension or figure. In these features the monads of Leibniz were similar to the material
points of Boscovich ; but Leibniz ascribed to his monads 1 perception and appetition in
addition to an equivalent of inertia. They are centres of force, and the force exerted is a
vis viva. Boscovich opposes this idea of a " living," or " lively " force ; and in this first
dissertation we may trace the first ideas of the formulation of his own material points.
Leibniz denies action at a distance ; with Boscovich it is the fundamental characteristic of
a material point.

The principles developed in the work on collisions of bodies were applied to the problem
of the centre of oscillation. During the latter investigation Boscovich was led to a theorem
on the mutual forces between the bodies forming a system of three ; and from this theorem
there followed the natural explanation of a whole sequence of phenomena, mostly connected
with the idea of a statical moment ; and his initial intention was to have published a
dissertation on this theorem and deductions from it, as a specimen of the use and advantage
of his principles. But all this time these principles had been developing in two directions,
mathematically and philosophically, and by this time included the fundamental notions
of the law of forces for material points. The essay on the centre of oscillation grew in length
as it proceeded ; until, finally, Boscovich added to it all that he had already published on
the subject of his principles and other matters which, as he says, " obtruded themselves on
his notice as he was writing." The whole of this material he rearranged into a more logical
(but unfortunately for a study of development of ideas, non-chronological) order before
publication.

As stated by Boscovich, in Art. 164, the whole of his Theory is contained in his statement
that : " Matter is composed of perfectly indivisible, non-extended, discrete points." To this
assertion is conjoined the axiom that no two material points can be in the same point of
space at the same time. As stated above, in opposition to Clerk Maxwell, this is no matter
of prejudice. Boscovich, in Art. 361, gives his own reasons for taking this axiom as part
of his theory. He lays it down that the number of material points is finite, whereas the
number of local points is an infinity of three dimensions ; hence it is infinitely improbable,
i.e., impossible, that two material points, without the action of a directive mind, should
ever encounter one another, and thus be in the same place at the same time. He even goes
further ; he asserts elsewhere that no material point ever returns to any point of space in
which it has ever been before, or in which any other material point has ever been. Whether
his arguments are sound or not, the matter does not rest on a prejudgment formed from
experience of bodies of sensible size ; Boscovich has convinced himself by such arguments
of the truth of the principle of Impenetrability, and lays it down as axiomatic ; and upon
this, as one of his foundations, builds his complete theory. The consequence of this axiom
is immediately evident ; there can be no such thing as contact between any two material
points ; two points cannot be contiguous or, as Boscovich states, no two points of matter
can be in mathematical contact. For, since material points have no
dimensions, if, to form an imagery of Boscovich's argument, we take
two little squares ABDC, CDFE to represent two points in mathema-
tical contact along the side CD, then CD must also coincide with AB,
and EF with CD ; that is the points which we have supposed to be
contiguous must also be coincident. This is contrary to the axiom of
Impenetrability ; and hence material points must be separated always O U Ir
by a finite interval, no matter how small. This finite interval however
has no minimum ; nor has it, on the other hand, on account of the infinity of space, any
maximum, except under certain hypothetical circumstances which may possibly exist.
Lastly, these points of matter float, so to speak, in an absolute void.

Every material point is exactly like every other material point ; each is postulated to
have an inherent propensity (determinatio) to remain in a state of rest or uniform motion in
a straight line, whichever of these is supposed to be its initial state, so long as the point is
not subject to some external influence. Thus it is endowed with an equivalent of inertia
as formulated by Newton ; but as we shall see, there does not enter the Newtonian idea
of inertia as a characteristic of mass. The propensity is akin to the characteristic ascribed
to the monad by Leibniz ; with this difference, that it is not a symptom of activity, as with
Leibniz, but one of inactivity.

1 See Bertrand Russell, Philosophy of Leibniz ; especially p. 91 for connection between Boscovich and Leibniz.

INTRODUCTION xiii

Further, according to Boscovich, there is a mutual vis between every pair of points,
the magnitude of which depends only on the distance between them. At first sight, there
would seem to be an incongruity in this supposition ; for, since a point has no magnitude,
it cannot have any mass, considered as " quantity of matter " ; and therefore, if the slightest
" force " (according to the ordinary acceptation of the term) existed between two points,
there would be an infinite acceleration or retardation of each point relative to the other.
If, on the other hand, we consider with Clerk Maxwell that each point of matter has a
definite small mass, this mass must be finite, no matter how small, and not infinitesimal.
For the mass of a point is the whole mass of a body, divided by the number of points of
matter composing that body, which are all exactly similar ; and this number Boscovich
asserts is finite. It follows immediately that the density of a material point must be infinite,
since the volume is an infinitesimal of the third order, if not of an infinite order, i.e., zero.
Now, infinite density, if not to all of us, to Boscovich at least is unimaginable. Clerk
Maxwell, in ascribing mass to a Boscovichian point of matter, seems to have been obsessed
by a prejudice, that very prejudice which obsesses most scientists of the present day, namely,
that there can be no force without mass. He understood that Boscovich ascribed to each
pair of points a mutual attraction or repulsion ; and, in consequence, prejudiced by Newton's
Laws of Motion, he ascribed mass to a material point of Boscovich.

This apparent incongruity, however, disappears when it is remembered that the word
vis, as used by the mathematicians of the period of Boscovich, had many different meanings ;
or rather that its meaning was given by the descriptive adjective that was associated with it.
Thus we have vis viva (later associated with energy), vis mortua (the antithesis of vis viva,
as understood by Leibniz), vis acceleratrix (acceleration), vis matrix (the real equivalent
of force, since it varied with the mass directly), vis descensiva (moment of a weight hung at
one end of a lever), and so on. Newton even, in enunciating his law of universal gravitation,
apparently asserted nothing more than the fact of gravitation — a propensity for approach —
according to the inverse square of the distance : and Boscovich imitates him in this. The
mutual vires, ascribed by Boscovich to his pairs of points, are really accelerations, i.e.
tendencies for mutual approach or recession of the two points, depending on the distance
between the points at the time under consideration. Boscovich's own words, as given in
Art. 9, are : " Censeo igitur bina quaecunque materise puncta determinari asque in aliis
distantiis ad mutuum accessum, in aliis ad recessum mutuum, quam ipsam determinationem
apello vim." The cause of this determination, or propensity, for approach or recession,
which in the case of bodies of sensible size is more correctly called " force " (vis matrix),
Boscovich does not seek to explain ; he merely postulates the propensities. The measures
of these propensities, i.e., the accelerations of the relative velocities, are the ordinates of
what is usually called his curve of forces. This is corroborated by the statement of Boscovich
that the areas under the arcs of his curve are proportional to squares of velocities ; which
is in accordance with the formula we should now use for the area under an " acceleration-
space " graph (Area = J f.ds = j-r-ds = I v.dv). See Note (f) to Art. 118, where it is

evident that the word vires, translated " forces," strictly means " accelerations ; " seejalso Art.64-
Thus it would appear that in the Theory of Boscovich we have something totally
different from the monads of Leibniz, which are truly centres of force. Again, although
there are some points of similarity with the ideas of Newton, more especially in the
postulation of an acceleration of the relative velocity of every pair of points of matter due
to and depending upon the relative distance between them, without any endeavour to
explain this acceleration or gravitation ; yet the Theory of Boscovich differs from that of
Newton in being purely kinematical. His material point is defined to be without parts,
i.e., it has no volume ; as such it can have no mass, and can exert no force, as we understand
such terms. The sole characteristic that has a finite measure is the relative acceleration
produced by the simultaneous existence of two points of matter ; and this acceleration
depends solely upon the distance between them. The Newtonian idea of mass is replaced
by something totally different ; it is a mere number, without " dimension " ; the " mass "
of a body is simply the number of points that are combined to " form " the body.

Each of these points, if sufficiently close together, will exert on another point of matter,
at a relatively much greater distance from every point of the body, the same acceleration
very approximately. Hence, if we have two small bodies A and B, situated at a distance s
from one another (the wording of this phrase postulates that the points of each body are
very close together as compared with the distance between the bodies) : and if the number
of points in A and B are respectively a and b, and / is the mutual acceleration between any
pair of material points at a distance s from one another ; then, each point of A will give to
each point of B an acceleration /. Hence, the body A will give to each point of B, and
therefore to the whole of B, an acceleration equal to a/. Similarly the body B will give to

xiv INTRODUCTION

the body A an acceleration equal to bf. Similarly, if we placed a third body, C, at a distance
j from A and B, the body A would give the body C an acceleration equal to af, and the body
B would give the body C an acceleration equal to bf. That is, the accelerations given to a
standard body C are proportional to the " number of points " in the bodies producing
these accelerations ; thus, numerically, the " mass " of Boscovich comes to the same thing
as the " mass " of Newton. Further, the acceleration given by C to the bodies A and B
is the same for either, namely, cf ; from which it follows that all bodies have their velocities
of fall towards the earth equally accelerated, apart from the resistance of the air ; and so on.
But the term " force," as the cause of acceleration is not applied by Boscovich to material
points ; nor is it used in the Newtonian sense at all. When Boscovich investigates the
attraction of " bodies," he introduces the idea of a cause, but then only more or less as a
convenient phrase. Although, as a philosopher, Boscovich denies that there is any possibility
of a fortuitous circumstance (and here indeed we may admit a prejudice derived from
experience ; for he states that what we call fortuitous is merely something for which we,
in our limited intelligence, can assign no cause), yet with him the existent thing is motion
and not force. The latter word is merely a convenient phrase to describe the " product " of
" mass " and " acceleration."

To sum up, it would seem that the curve of Boscovich is an acceleration-interval graph ;
and it is a mistake to refer to his cosmic system as a system of " force-centres." His material
points have zero volume, zero mass, and exert zero force. In fact, if one material point
alone existed outside the mind, and there were no material point forming part of the mind,
then this single external point could in no way be perceived. In other words, a single
point would give no sense-datum apart from another point ; and thus single points might
be considered as not perceptible in themselves, but as becoming so in relation to other
material points. This seems to be the logical deduction from the strict sense of the
definition given by Boscovich ; what Boscovich himself thought is given in the supplements
that follow the third part of the treatise. Nevertheless, the phraseology of " attraction "
and " repulsion " is so much more convenient than that of " acceleration of the velocity of
approach " and " acceleration of the velocity of recession," that it will be used in what
follows : as it has been used throughout the translation of the treatise.

There is still another point to be considered before we take up the study of the Boscovich
curve ; namely, whether we are to consider Boscovich as, consciously or unconsciously, an
atomist in the strict sense of the word. The practical test for this question would seem
to be simply whether the divisibility of matter was considered to be limited or unlimited.
Boscovich himself appears to be uncertain of his ground, hardly knowing which point of
view is the logical outcome of his definition of a material point. For, in Art. 394, he denies
infinite divisibility ; but he admits infinite componibility. The denial of infinite divisibility
is necessitated by his denial of " anything infinite in Nature, or in extension, or a self-
determined infinitely small." The admission of infinite componibility is necessitated by
his definition of the material point ; since it has no parts, a fresh point can always be placed
between any two points without being contiguous to either. Now, since he denies the
existence of the infinite and the infinitely small, the attraction or repulsion between two
points of matter (except at what he calls the limiting intervals) must be finite : hence, since
the attractions of masses are all by observation finite, it follows that the number of points
in a mass must be finite. To evade the difficulty thus raised, he appeals to the scale of
integers, in which there is no infinite number : but, as he says, the scale of integers is a
sequence of numbers increasing indefinitely, and having no last term. Thus, into any space,
however small, there may be crowded an indefinitely great number of material points ; this
number can be still further increased to any extent ; and yet the number of points finally
obtained is always finite. It would, again, seem that the system of Boscovich was not a
material system, but a system of relations ; if it were not for the fact that he asserts, in
Art. 7, that his view is that " the Universe does not consist of vacuum interspersed amongst
matter, but that matter is interspersed in a vacuum and floats in it." The whole question
is still further complicated by his remark, in Art. 393, that in the continual division of a
body, " as soon as we reach intervals less than the distance between two material points,
further sections will cut empty intervals and not matter " ; and yet he has postulated that
there is no minimum value to the interval between two material points. Leaving, however,
this question of the philosophical standpoint of Boscovich to be decided by the reader, after
a study of the supplements that follow the third part of the treatise, let us now consider the
curve of Boscovich.

Boscovich, from experimental data, gives to his curve, when the interval is large, a
branch asymptotic to the axis of intervals ; it approximates to the " hyperbola " x*y— c, in
which x represents the interval between two points, and y the vis corresponding to that
interval, which we have agreed to call an attraction, meaning thereby, not a force, but an

INTRODUCTION xv

acceleration of the velocity of approach. For small intervals he has as yet no knowledge
of the quality or quantity of his ordinates. In Supplement IV, he gives some very ingenious
arguments against forces that are attractive at very small distances and increase indefinitely,
such as would be the case where the law of forces was represented by an inverse power of
the interval, or even where the force varied inversely as the interval. For the inverse fourth
or higher power, he shows that the attraction of a sphere upon a point on its surface would
be less than the attraction of a part of itself on this point ; for the inverse third power, he con-
siders orbital motion, which in this case is an equiangular spiral motion, and deduces that
after a finite time the particle must be nowhere at all. Euler, considering this case, asserted
that on approaching the centre of force the particle must be annihilated ; Boscovich, with
more justice, argues that this law of force must be impossible. For the inverse square law,
the limiting case of an elliptic orbit, when the transverse velocity at the end of the major
axis is decreased indefinitely, is taken ; this leads to rectilinear motion of the particle to the
centre of force and a return from it ; which does not agree with the otherwise proved
oscillation through the centre of force to an equal distance on either side.

Now it is to be observed that this supplement is quoted from his dissertation De Lege
Firium in Natura existentium, which was published in 1755 ; also that in 1743 he had
published a dissertation of which the full title is : De Motu Corporis attracti in centrum
immobile viribus decrescentibus in ratione distantiarum reciproca duplicata in spatiis non
resistentibus. Hence it is not too much to suppose that somewhere between 1741 and 1755
he had tried to find a means of overcoming this discrepancy ; and he was thus led to suppose
that, in the case of rectilinear motion under an inverse square law, there was a departure
from the law on near approach to the centre of force ; that the attraction was replaced by a
repulsion increasing indefinitely as the distance decreased ; for this obviously would lead to
an oscillation to the centre and back, and so come into agreement with the limiting case of
the elliptic orbit. I therefore suggest that it was this consideration that led Boscovich to
the doctrine of Impenetrability. However, in the treatise itself, Boscovich postulates the
axiom of Impenetrability as applying in general, and thence argues that the force at infinitely
small distances must be repulsive and increasing indefinitely. Hence the ordinate to the
curve near the origin must be drawn in the opposite direction to that of the ordinates for
sensible distances, and the area under this branch of the curve must be indefinitely great.
That is to say, the branch must be asymptotic to the axis of ordinates ; Boscovich however
considers that this does not involve an infinite ordinate at the origin, because the interval
between two material points is never zero ; or, vice versa, since the repulsion increases
indefinitely for very small intervals, the velocity of relative approach, no matter how great,
of two material points is always destroyed before actual contact ; which necessitates a finite
interval between two material points, and the impossibility of encounter under any circum-
stances : the interval however, since a velocity of mutual approach may be supposed to be
of any magnitude, can have no minimum. Two points are said to be in physical contact,
in opposition to mathematical contact, when they are so close together that this great mutual
repulsion is sufficiently increased to prevent nearer approach.

Since Boscovich has these two asymptotic branches, and he postulates Continuity,
there must be a continuous curve, with a one-valued ordinate for any interval, to represent
the " force " at all other distances ; hence the curve must cut the axis at some point in
between, or the ordinate must become infinite. He does not lose sight of this latter possi-
bility, but apparently discards it for certain mechanical and physical reasons. Now, it is
known that as the degree of a curve rises, the number of curves of that degree increases very
rapidly ; there is only one of the first degree, the conic sections of the second degree, while
Newton had found over three-score curves with equations of the third degree, and nobody
had tried to find all the curves of the fourth degree. Since his curve is not one of the known
curves, Boscovich concludes that the degree of its equation is very high, even if it is not
transcendent. But the higher the degree of a curve, the greater the number of possible
intersections with a given straight line ; that is to say, it is highly probable that there are a
great many intersections of the curve with the axis ; i.e., points giving zero action for
material points situated "at the corresponding distance from one another. Lastly, since the
ordinate is one-valued, the equation of the curve, as stated in Supplement III, must be of
the form P-Qy = o, where P and Q are functions of x alone. Thus we have a curve winding
about the axis for intervals that are very small and developing finally into the hyperbola of
the third degree for sensible intervals. This final branch, however, cannot be exactly this
hyperbola ; for, Boscovich argues, if any finite arc of the curve ever coincided exactly with
the hyperbola of the third degree, it would be a breach of continuity if it ever departed from
it. Hence he concludes that the inverse square law is observed approximately only, even
at large distances.

As stated above, the possibility of other asymptotes, parallel to the asymptote at the

INTRODUCTION

origin, is not lost sight of. The consequence of one occurring at a very small distance from
the origin is discussed in full. Boscovich, however, takes great pains to show that all the
phenomena discussed can be explained on the assumption of a number of points of inter-
section of his curve with the axis, combined with different characteristics of the arcs that lie
between these points of intersection. There is, however, one suggestion that is very
interesting, especially in relation to recent statements of Einstein and Weyl. Suppose that
beyond the distances of the solar system, for which the inverse square law obtains approxi-
mately at least, the curve of forces, after touching the axis (as it may do, since it does not
coincide exactly with the hyperbola of the third degree), goes off to infinity in the positive
direction ; or suppose that, after cutting the axis (as again it may do, for the reason given
above), it once more begins to wind round the axis and finally has an asymptotic attractive
branch. Then it is evident that the universe in which we live is a self-contained cosmic
system ; for no point within it can ever get beyond the distance of this further asymptote.
If in addition, beyond this further asymptote, the curve had an asymptotic repulsive branch
and went on as a sort of replica of the curve already obtained, then no point outside our
universe could ever enter within it. Thus there is a possibility of infinite space being
filled with a succession of cosmic systems, each of which would never interfere with any
other ; indeed, a mind existing in any one of these universes could never perceive the
existence of any other universe except that in which it existed. Thus space might be in
reality infinite, and yet never could be perceived except as finite.

The use Boscovich makes of his curve, the ingenuity of his explanations and their logic,
the strength or weakness of his attacks on the theories of other philosophers, are left to the
consideration of the reader of the text. It may, however, be useful to point out certain
matters which seem more than usually interesting. Boscovich points out that no philosopher
has attempted to prove the existence of a centre of gravity. It would appear especially that
he is, somehow or other, aware of the mistake made by Leibniz in his early days (a mistake
corrected by Huygens according to the statement of Leibniz), and of the use Leibniz later
made of the principle of moments ; Boscovich has apparently considered the work of Pascal
and others, especially Guldinus ;, it looks almost as if (again, somehow or other) he had seen
some description of " The Method " of Archimedes. For he proceeds to define the centre
of gravity geometrically, and to prove that there is always a centre of gravity, or rather a
geometrical centroid ; whereas, even for a triangle, there is no centre of magnitude, with
which Leibniz seems to have confused a centroid before his conversation with Huygens.
This existence proof, and the deductions from it, are necessary foundations for the centro-
baryc analysis of Leibniz. The argument is shortly as follows : Take a plane outside, say
to the right of, all the points of all the bodies under consideration ; find the sum of all the
distances of all the points from this plane ; divide this sum by the number of points ; draw
a plane to the left of and parallel to the chosen plane, at a distance from it equal to the
quotient just found. Then, observing algebraic sign, this is a plane such that the sum of
the distances of all the points from it is zero ; i.e., the sum of the distances of all the points
on one side of this plane is equal arithmetically to the sum of the distances of all the points on
the other side. Find a similar plane of equal distances in another direction ; this intersects
the first plane in a straight line. A third similar plane cuts this straight line in a point ;
this point is the centroid ; it has the unique property that all planes through it are planes
of equal distances. If some of the points are conglomerated to form a particle, the sum
of the distances for each of the points is equal to the distance of the particle multiplied by
the number of points in the particle, i.e., by the mass of the particle. Hence follows the
theorem for the statical moment for lines and planes or other surfaces, as well as for solids
that have weight.

Another interesting point, in relation to recent work, is the subject-matter of Art. 230-
236 ; where it is shown that, due solely to the mutual forces exerted on a third point by
two points separated by a proper interval, there is a series of orbits, approximately confocal
ellipses, in which the third point is in a state of steady motion ; these orbits are alternately
stable and stable. If the steady motion in a stable orbit is disturbed, by a sufficiently great
difference of the velocity being induced by the action of a fourth point passing sufficiently
near the third point, this third point will leave its orbit and immediately take up another
stable orbit, after some initial oscillation about it. This elegant little theorem does not
depend in any way on the exact form of the curve of forces, so long as there are •portions of the
curve winding about the axis for very small intervals between the points.

It is sufficient, for the next point, to draw the reader's attention to Art. 266-278, on
collision, and to the articles which follow on the agreement between .resolution and com-
position of forces as a working hypothesis. From what Boscovich says, it would appear that
philosophers of his time were much perturbed over the idea that, when a force was resolved
into two forces at a sufficiently obtuse angle, the force itself might be less than either of

INTRODUCTION xvii

the resolutes. Boscovich points out that, in his Theory, there is no resolution, only com-
position ; and therefore the difficulty does not arise. In this connection he adds that there
are no signs in Nature of anything approaching the vires viva of Leibniz.

In Art. 294 we have Boscovich's contribution to the controversy over the correct
measure of the " quantity of motion " ; but, as there is no attempt made to follow out the
change in either the velocity or the square of the velocity, it cannot be said to lead to any-
thing conclusive. As a matter of fact, Boscovich uses the result to prove the non-existence
of vires vivce.

In Art. 298-306 we have a mechanical exposition of reflection and refraction of light.
This comes under the section on Mechanics, because with Boscovich light is matter moving
with a very high velocity, and therefore reflection is a case of impact, in that it depends
upon the destruction of the whole of the perpendicular velocity upon entering the " surface "
of a denser medium, the surface being that part of space in front of the physical surface of
the medium in which the particles of light are near enough to the denser medium to feel the
influence of the last repulsive asymptotic branch of the curve of forces. If this perpendicular
velocity is not all destroyed, the particle enters the medium, and is refracted ; in which
case, the existence of a sine law is demonstrated. It is to be noted that the " fits " of
alternate attraction and repulsion, postulated by Newton, follow as a natural consequence
of the winding portion of the curve of Boscovich.

In Art. 328-346 we have a discussion of the centre of oscillation, and the centre of
percussion is investigated as well for masses in a plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation,
and masses lying in a straight line, where each mass is connected with the different centres.
Boscovich deduces from his theory the theorems, amongst others, that the centres of suspen-
sion and oscillation are interchangeable, and that the distance between them is equal to the
distance of the centre of percussion from the axis of rotation ; he also gives a rule for finding
the simple equivalent pendulum. The work is completed in a letter to Fr. Scherffer, which
is appended at the end of this volume.

In the third section, which deals with the application of the Theory to Physics, we
naturally do not look for much that is of value. But, in Art. 505, Boscovich evidently has
the correct notion that sound is a longitudinal vibration of the air or some other medium ;
and he is able to give an explanation of the propagation of the disturbance purely by means
of the mutual forces between the particles of the medium. In Art. 507 he certainly states
that the cause of heat is a " vigorous internal motion " ; but this motion is that of the
" particles of fire," if it is a motion ; an alternative reason is however given, namely, that it
may be a " fermentation of a sulphurous substance with particles of light." " Cold is
a lack of this substance, or of a motion of it." No attention will be called to this part
of the work, beyond an expression of admiration for the great ingenuity of a large part
of it.

There is a metaphysical appendix on the seat of the mind, and its nature, and on the
existence and attributes of GOD. This is followed by two short discussions of a philosophical
nature on Space and Time. Boscovich does not look on either of these as being in themselves
existent ; his entities are modes of existence, temporal and local. These three sections are
full of interest for the modern philosophical reader.

Supplement V is a theoretical proof, purely derived from the theory of mutual actions
between points of matter, of the law of the lever ; this is well worth study.

There are two points of historical interest beyond the study of the work of Boscovich
that can be gathered from this volume. The first is that at this time it would appear that
the nature of negative numbers and quantities was not yet fully understood. Boscovich, to
make his curve more symmetrical, continues it to the left of the origin as a reflection in the
axis of ordinates. It is obvious, however, that, if distances to the left of the origin stand for
intervals measured in the opposite direction to the ordinary (remembering that of the two
points under consideration one is supposed to be at the origin), then the force just the other
side of the axis of ordinates must be repulsive ; but the repulsion is in the opposite direction
to the ordinary way of measuring it, and therefore should appear on the curve represented
by an ordinate of attraction. Thus, the curve of Boscovich, if completed, should have point
symmetry about the origin, and not line symmetry about the axis of ordinates. Boscovich,
however, avoids this difficulty, intentionally or unintentionally, when showing how the
equation to the curve may be obtained, by taking z = x* as his variable, and P and Q as
functions of z, in the equation P-Qy = o, referred to above. Note. — In this connection
(p. 410, Art. 25, 1. 5), Boscovich has apparently made a slip over the negative sign : as the
intention is clear, no attempt has been made to amend the Latin.

The second point is that Boscovich does not seem to have any idea of integrating between
limits. He has to find the area, in Fig. I on p. 134, bounded by the axes, the curve and the
ordinate ag ; this he does by the use of the calculus in Note (1) on p. 141. He assumes that

xviii INTRODUCTION

gt

the equation of the curve is xmyn = I, and obtains the integral - - xy + A, where A is the

n—m

constant of integration. He states that, if n is greater than m, A = o, being the initial area
at the origin. He is then faced with the necessity of making the area infinite when n = m,
and still more infinite when n<jn. He says : " The area is infinite, when n = m, because
this makes the divisor zero ; and thus the area becomes still more infinite if n<^m." Put

into symbols, the argument is : Since «-OT<O, >- > oo . The historically interesting

n— m o

point about this is that it represents the persistance of an error originally made by Wallis
in his Ariihmetica Infinitorum (it was Wallis who invented the sign oc to stand for " simple
infinity," the value of i/o, and hence of «/o). Wallis had justification for his error, if
indeed it was an error in his case ; for his exponents were characteristics of certain infinite
series, and he could make his own laws about these so that they suited the geometrical
problems to which they were applied ; it was not necessary that they should obey the laws
of inequality that were true for ordinary numbers. Boscovich's mistake is, of course, that
of assuming that the constant is zero in every case ; and in this he is probably deceived by

using the formula xy -f- A, instead of ^B/("-*l) -}- A, for the area. From the latter

n—m n — m

it is easily seen that since the initial area is zero, we must have A = ow/("~m). If n is

m— n

equal to or greater than m, the constant A is indeed zero ; but if n is less than m, the constant
is infinite. The persistence of this error for so long a time, from 1655 to 175%> during which
we have the writings of Newton, Leibniz, the Bernoullis and others on the calculus, seems
to lend corroboration to a doubt as to whether the integral sign was properly understood as
a summation between limits, and that this sum could be expressed as the difference of two
values of the same function of those limits. It appears to me that this point is one of
very great importance in the history of the development of mathematical thought.

Some idea of how prolific Boscovich was as an author may be gathered from the catalogue
of his writings appended at the end of this volume. This catalogue has been taken from the
end of the original first Venetian edition, and brings the list up to the date of its publication,
1763. It was felt to be an impossible task to make this list complete up to the time of the
death of Boscovich ; and an incomplete continuation did not seem desirable. Mention
must however be made of one other work of Boscovich at least ; namely, a work in five
quarto volumes, published in 1785, under the title of Opera pertinentia ad Opticam et
Astronomiam.

Finally, in order to bring out the versatility of the genius of Boscovich, we may mention
just a few of his discoveries in science, which seem to call for special attention. In astro-
nomical science, he speaks of the use of a telescope filled with liquid for the purpose of
measuring the aberration of light ; he invented a prismatic micrometer contemporaneously
with Rochon and Maskelyne. He gave methods for determining the orbit of a comet from
three observations, and for the equator of the sun from three observations of a " spot " ;
he carried out some investigations on the orbit of Uranus, and considered the rings of Saturn.
In what was then the subsidiary science of optics, he invented a prism with a variable angle
for measuring the refraction and dispersion of different kinds of glass ; and put forward a
theory of achromatism for the objectives and oculars of the telescope. In mechanics and
geodesy, he was apparently the first to solve the problem of the " body of greatest attraction " ;
he successfully attacked the question of the earth's density ; and perfected the apparatus
and advanced the theory of the measurement of the meridian. In mathematical theory,
he seems to have recognized, before Lobachevski and Bolyai, the impossibility of a proof of
Euclid's " parallel postulate " ; and considered the theory of the logarithms of negative
numbers.

J. M. C.

N.B. — The page numbers on the left-hand pages of the index are the pages of the
original Latin Edition of 1763 ; they correspond with the clarendon numbers inserted
throughout the Latin text of this edition.

CORRIGENDA

Attention is called to the following important corrections, omissions, and alternative renderings ; misprints
involving a single letter or syllable only are given at the end of the volume.

p. 27, 1. 8, for in one plane read in the same direction

p. 47, 1. 62, literally on which ... is exerted

p. 49, 1. 33, for just as ... is read so that . . . may be

P- S3> 1- 9> after a line add but not parts of the line itself

p. 61, Art. 47, Alternative rendering: These instances make good the same point as water making its way through

the pores of a sponge did for impenetrability ;

p. 67, 1. 5, for it is allowable for me read I am disposed ; unless in the original libet is taken to be a misprint for licet
p. 73, 1. 26, after nothing add in the strict meaning of the term
p. 85, 1. 27, after conjunction add of the same point of space

p. 91, 1. 25, Alternative rendering : and these properties might distinguish the points even in the view of the followers
of Leibniz

1. 5 from bottom, Alternative rendering : Not to speak of the actual form of the leaves present in the seed
p. 115, 1. 25, after the left add but that the two outer elements do not touch each other

1. 28, for two little spheres read one little sphere
p. 117, 1. 41, for precisely read abstractly
p. 125, 1. 29, for ignored read urged in reply
p. 126, 1. 6 from bottom, it is -possible that acquirere is intended for acquiescere, with a corresponding change in the

translation

p. 129, Art. 162, marg. note, for on what they may be founded read in what it consists,
p. 167, Art. 214, 1. 2 of marg. note, transpose by and on

footnote, 1. I, for be at read bisect it at
p. 199, 1. 24, for so that read just as
p. 233, 1. 4 from bottom, for base to the angle read base to the sine of the angle

last line, after vary insert inversely

p. 307, 1. 5 from end, for motion, as (with fluids) takes place read motion from taking place
p. 323, 1. 39, for the agitation will read the fluidity will
P- 345» 1- 32> for described read destroyed
p. 357, 1. 44, for others read some, others of others

1. 5 from end, for fire read a fiery and insert a comma before substance

XIX

THEORIA
PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS

TYPOGRAPHUS

VENETUS

LECTORI

PUS, quod tibi offero, jam ab annis quinque Viennse editum, quo plausu
exceptum sit per Europam, noveris sane, si Diaria publica perlegeris, inter
quse si, ut omittam caetera, consulas ea, quae in Bernensi pertinent ad
initium anni 1761 ; videbis sane quo id loco haberi debeat. Systema
continet Naturalis Philosophise omnino novum, quod jam ab ipso Auctore
suo vulgo Boscovichianum appellant. Id quidem in pluribus Academiis
jam passim publice traditur, nee tantum in annuis thesibus, vel disserta-
tionibus impressis, ac propugnatis exponitur, sed & in pluribus elementaribus libris pro
juventute instituenda editis adhibetur, exponitur, & a pluribus habetur pro archetype.
Verum qui omnem systematis compagem, arctissimum partium nexum mutuum, fcecun-
ditatem summam, ac usum amplissimum ac omnem, quam late patet, Naturam ex unica
simplici lege virium derivandam intimius velit conspicere, ac contemplari, hoc Opus
consulat, necesse est.

Haec omnia me permoverant jam ab initio, ut novam Operis editionem curarem :
accedebat illud, quod Viennensia exemplaria non ita facile extra Germaniam itura videbam,
& quidem nunc etiam in reliquis omnibus Europse partibus, utut expetita, aut nuspiam
venalia prostant, aut vix uspiam : systema vero in Italia natum, ac ab Auctore suo pluribus
hie apud nos jam dissertationibus adumbratum, & casu quodam Viennae, quo se ad breve
tempus contulerat, digestum, ac editum, Italicis potissimum typis, censebam, per univer-
sam Europam disseminandum. Et quidem editionem ipsam e Viennensi exemplari jam
turn inchoaveram ; cum illud mihi constitit, Viennensem editionem ipsi Auctori, post cujus
discessum suscepta ibi fuerat, summopere displicere : innumera obrepsisse typorum menda :
esse autem multa, inprimis ea, quas Algebraicas formulas continent, admodum inordinata,
& corrupta : ipsum eorum omnium correctionem meditari, cum nonnullis mutationibus,
quibus Opus perpolitum redderetur magis, & vero etiam additamentis.

Illud ergo summopere desideravi, ut exemplar acquirerem ab ipso correctum, & auctum
ac ipsum edition! praesentem haberem, & curantem omnia per sese. At id quidem per
hosce annos obtinere non licuit, eo universam fere Europam peragrante ; donee demum
ex tarn longa peregrinatione redux hue nuper se contulit, & toto adstitit editionis tempore,
ac praeter correctores nostros omnem ipse etiam in corrigendo diligentiam adhibuit ;
quanquam is ipse haud quidem sibi ita fidit, ut nihil omnino effugisse censeat, cum ea sit
humanas mentis conditio, ut in eadem re diu satis intente defigi non possit.

Haec idcirco ut prima quaedam, atque originaria editio haberi debet, quam qui cum
Viennensi contulerit, videbit sane discrimen. E minoribus mutatiunculis multae pertinent
ad expolienda, & declaranda plura loca ; sunt tamen etiam nonnulla potissimum in pagin-
arum fine exigua additamenta, vel mutatiunculas exiguae factae post typographicam
constructionem idcirco tantummodo, ut lacunulae implerentur quae aliquando idcirco
supererant, quod plures ph'ylirae a diversis compositoribus simul adornabantur, & quatuor
simul praela sudabant; quod quidem ipso praesente fieri facile potuit, sine ulla pertur-
batione sententiarum, & ordinis.

THE PRINTER AT VENICE

TO

THE READER

! OU will be well aware, if you have read the public journals, with what applause
the work which I now offer to you has been received throughout Europe
since its publication at Vienna five years ago. Not to mention others, if
you refer to the numbers of the Berne Journal for the early part of the
year 1761, you will not fail to see how highly it has been esteemed. It
contains an entirely new system of Natural Philosophy, which is already
commonly known as the Boscovichian theory, from the name of its author,
As a matter of fact, it is even now a subject of public instruction in several Universities in
different parts ; it is expounded not only in yearly theses or dissertations, both printed &
debated ; but also in several elementary books issued for the instruction of the young it is
introduced, explained, & by many considered as their original. Any one, however, who
wishes to obtain more detailed insight into the whole structure of the theory, the close
relation that its several parts bear to one another, or its great fertility & wide scope for
the purpose of deriving the whole of Nature, in her widest range, from a single simple law
of forces ; any one who wishes to make a deeper study of it must perforce study the work
here offered.

All these considerations had from the first moved me to undertake a new edition of
the work ; in addition, there was the fact that I perceived that it would be a matter of some
difficulty for copies of the Vienna edition to pass beyond the confines of Germany — indeed,
at the present time, no matter how diligently they are inquired for, they are to be found
on sale nowhere, or scarcely anywhere, in the rest of Europe. The system had its birth in
Italy, & its outlines had already been sketched by the author in several dissertations pub-
lished here in our own land ; though, as luck would have it, the system itself was finally
put into shape and published at Vienna, whither he had gone for a short time. I therefore
thought it right that it should be disseminated throughout the whole of Europe, & that
preferably as the product of an Italian press. I had in fact already commenced an edition
founded on a copy of the Vienna edition, when it came to my knowledge that the author
was greatly dissatisfied with the Vienna edition, taken in hand there after his departure ;
that innumerable printer's errors had crept in ; that many passages, especially those that
contain Algebraical formulae, were ill-arranged and erroneous ; lastly, that the author
himself had in mind a complete revision, including certain alterations, to give a better
finish to the work, together with certain additional matter.

That being the case, I was greatly desirous of obtaining a copy, revised & enlarged
by himself ; I also wanted to have him at hand whilst the edition was in progress, & that
he should superintend the whole thing for himself. This, however, I was unable to procure
during the last few years, in which he has been travelling through nearly the whole of
Europe ; until at last he came here, a little while ago, as he returned home from his lengthy
wanderings, & stayed here to assist me during the whole time that the edition was in
hand. He, in addition to our regular proof-readers, himself also used every care in cor-
recting the proof ; even then, however, he has not sufficient confidence in himself as to
imagine that not the slightest thing has escaped him. For it is a characteristic of the human
mind that it cannot concentrate long on the same subject with sufficient attention.

It follows that this ought to be considered in some measure as a first & original
edition ; any one who compares it with that issued at Vienna will soon see the difference
between them. Many of the minor alterations are made for the purpose of rendering
certain passages more elegant & clear ; there are, however, especially at the foot of a
page, slight additions also, or slight changes made after the type was set up, merely for
the purpose of filling up gaps that were left here & there — these gaps being due to the
fact that several sheets were being set at the same time by different compositors, and four
presses were kept hard at work together. As he was at hand, this could easily be done
without causing any disturbance of the sentences or the pagination.

4 TYPOGRAPHUS VENETUS LECTORI

Inter mutationes occurret ordo numerorum mutatus in paragraphis : nam numerus 82
de novo accessit totus : deinde is, qui fuerat 261 discerptus est in 5 ; demum in Appendice
post num. 534 factse sunt & mutatiunculse nonnullae, & additamenta plura in iis, quse
pertinent ad sedem animse.

Supplementorum ordo mutatus est itidem ; quse enim fuerant 3, & 4, jam sunt I, &
2 : nam eorum usus in ipso Opere ante alia occurrit. Illi autem, quod prius fuerat primum,
nunc autem est tertium, accessit in fine Scholium tertium, quod pluribus numeris complec-
titur dissertatiunculam integram de argumento, quod ante aliquot annos in Parisiensi
Academia controversise occasionem exhibuit in Encyclopedico etiam dictionario attactum,
in qua dissertatiuncula demonstrat Auctor non esse, cur ad vim exprimendam potentia
quaepiam distantiae adhibeatur potius, quam functio.

Accesserunt per totum Opus notulae marginales, in quibus eorum, quae pertractantur
argumenta exponuntur brevissima, quorum ope unico obtutu videri possint omnia, & in
memoriam facile revocari.

Postremo loco ad calcem Operis additus est fusior catalogus eorum omnium, quse hue
usque ab ipso Auctore sunt edita, quorum collectionem omnem expolitam, & correctam,
ac eorum, quse nondum absoluta sunt, continuationem meditatur, aggressurus illico post
suum regressum in Urbem Romam, quo properat. Hie catalogus impressus fuit Venetisis
ante hosce duos annos in reimpressione ejus poematis de Solis ac Lunae defectibus.
Porro earn, omnium suorum Operum Collectionem, ubi ipse adornaverit, typis ego meis
excudendam suscipiam, quam magnificentissime potero.

Haec erant, quae te monendum censui ; tu laboribus nostris fruere, & vive felix.

THE PRINTER AT VENICE TO THE READER 5

Among the more Important alterations will be found a change in the order of numbering
the paragraphs. Thus, Art. 82 is additional matter that is entirely new ; that which was
formerly Art. 261 is now broken up into five parts ; &, in the Appendix, following Art.
534, both some slight changes and also several additions have been made in the passages
that relate to the Seat of the Soul.

The order of the Supplements has been altered also : those that were formerly num-
bered III and IV are now I and II respectively. This was done because they are required
for use in this work before the others. To that which was formerly numbered I, but is
now III, there has been added a third scholium, consisting of several articles that between
them give a short but complete dissertation on that point which, several years ago caused
a controversy in the University of Paris, the same point being also discussed in the
Dictionnaire Encydopedique. In this dissertation the author shows that there is no reason
why any one power of the distance should be employed to express the force, in preference
to a function.

Short marginal summaries have been inserted throughout the work, in which the
arguments dealt with are given in brief ; by the help of these, the whole matter may be
taken in at a glance and recalled to mind with ease.

Lastly, at the end of the work, a somewhat full catalogue of the whole of the author's
publications up to the present time has been added. Of these publications the author
intends to make a full collection, revised and corrected, together with a continuation of
those that are not yet finished ; this he proposes to do after his return to Rome, for which
city he is preparing to set out. This catalogue was printed in Venice a couple of years ago
in connection with a reprint of his essay in verse on the eclipses of the Sun and Moon.
Later, when his revision of them is complete, I propose to undertake the printing of this
complete collection of his works from my own type, with all the sumptuousness at my
command.

Such were the matters that I thought ought to be brought to your notice. May you
enjoy the fruit of our labours, & live in happiness.

EPISTOLA AUCTORIS DEDICATORIA

EDITIONIS VIENNENSIS

AD CELSISSIMUM TUNC PRINCIPEM ARCHIEPISCOPUM

VIENNENSEM, NUNC PR^TEREA ET CARDINALEM

EMINENTISSIMUM, ET EPISCOPUM VACCIENSEM

CHRISTOPHORUM E COMITATIBUS DE MIGAZZI

IA.BIS veniam, Princeps Celsissime, si forte inter assiduas sacri regirninis curas
importunus interpellator advenio, & libellum Tibi offero mole tenuem, nee
arcana Religionis mysteria, quam in isto tanto constitutus fastigio adminis-
tras, sed Naturalis Philosophise principia continentem. Novi ego quidem,
quam totus in eo sis, ut, quam geris, personam sustineas, ac vigilantissimi
sacrorum Antistitis partes agas. Videt utique Imperialis haec Aula, videt
universa Regalis Urbs, & ingenti admiratione defixa obstupescit, qua dili-
gentia, quo labore tanti Sacerdotii munus obire pergas. Vetus nimirum illud celeberrimum
age, quod agis, quod ab ipsa Tibi juventute, cum primum, ut Te Romas dantem operam
studiis cognoscerem, mihi fors obtigit, altissime jam insederat animo, id in omni
reliquo amplissimorum munerum Tibi commissorum cursu haesit firmissime, atque idipsum
inprimis adjectum tarn multis & dotibus, quas a Natura uberrime congestas habes, &
virtutibus, quas tute diuturna Tibi exercitatione, atque assiduo labore comparasti, sanc-
tissime observatum inter tarn varias forenses, Aulicas, Sacerdotales occupationes, istos Tibi
tarn celeres dignitatum gradus quodammodo veluti coacervavit, & omnium una tarn
populorum, quam Principum admirationem excitavit ubique, conciliavit amorem ; unde
illud est factum, ut ab aliis alia Te, sublimiora semper, atque honorificentiora munera
quodammodo velut avulsum, atque abstractum rapuerint. Dum Romse in celeberrimo illo,
quod Auditorum Rotae appellant, collegio toti Christiano orbi jus diceres, accesserat
Hetrusca Imperialis Legatio apud Romanum Pontificem exercenda ; cum repente Mech-
liniensi Archiepiscopo in amplissima ilia administranda Ecclesia Adjutor datus, & destinatus
Successor, possessione prsestantissimi muneris vixdum capta, ad Hispanicum Regem ab
Augustissima Romanorum Imperatrice ad gravissima tractanda negotia Legatus es missus,
in quibus cum summa utriusque Aulae approbatione versatum per annos quinque ditissima
Vacciensis Ecclesia adepta est ; atque ibi dum post tantos Aularum strepitus ea, qua
Christianum Antistitem decet, & animi moderatione, & demissione quadam, atque in omne
hominum genus charitate, & singular! cura, ac diligentia Religionem administras, & sacrorum
exceres curam ; non ea tantum urbs, atque ditio, sed universum Hungariae Regnum,
quanquam exterum hominem, non ut civem suum tantummodo, sed ut Parentem aman-
tissimum habuit, quern adhuc ereptum sibi dolet, & angitur ; dum scilicet minore, quam
unius anni intervallo ab Ipsa Augustissima Imperatrice ad Regalem hanc Urbem, tot
Imperatorum sedem, ac Austriacae Dominationis caput, dignum tantis dotibus explicandis
theatrum, eocatum videt, atque in hac Celsissima Archiepiscopali Sede, accedente Romani
Pontificis Auctoritate collocatum ; in qua Tu quidem personam itidem, quam agis, diligen-
tissime sustinens, totus es in gravissimis Sacerdotii Tui expediendis negotiis, in iis omnibus,
quae ad sacra pertinent, curandis vel per Te ipsum usque adeo, ut saepe, raro admodum per

AUTHOR'S EPISTLE DEDICATING

THE FIRST VIENNA EDITION

TO

CHRISTOPHER, COUNT DE MIGAZZI, THEN HIS HIGHNESS
THE PRINCE ARCHBISHOP OF VIENNA, AND NOW ALSO
IN ADDITION HIS EMINENCE THE CARDINAL,

BISHOP OF VACZ

OU will pardon me, Most Noble Prince, if perchance I come to disturb at an
inopportune moment the unremitting cares of your Holy Office, & offer
you a volume so inconsiderable in size ; one too that contains none of the
inner mysteries of Religion, such as you administer from the highly exalted
position to which you are ordained ; one that merely deals with the prin-
ciples of Natural Philosophy. I know full well how entirely your time is
taken up with sustaining the reputation that you bear, & in performing
the duties of a highly conscientious Prelate. This Imperial Court sees, nay, the whole of
this Royal City sees, with what care, what toil, you exert yourself to carry out the duties of
so great a sacred office, & stands wrapt with an overwhelming admiration. Of a truth,
that well-known old saying, " What you do, DO," which from your earliest youth, when
chance first allowed me to make your acquaintance while you were studying in Rome, had
already fixed itself deeply in your mind, has remained firmly implanted there during the
whole of the remainder of a career in which duties of the highest importance have been
committed to your care. Your strict observance of this maxim in particular, joined with
those numerous talents so lavishly showered upon you by Nature, & those virtues which
you have acquired for yourself by daily practice & unremitting toil, throughout your
whole career, forensic, courtly, & sacerdotal, has so to speak heaped upon your shoulders
those unusually rapid advances in dignity that have been your lot. It has aroused the
admiration of all, both peoples & princes alike, in every land ; & at the same time it has
earned for you their deep affection. The consequence was that one office after another,
each ever more exalted & honourable than the preceding, has in a sense seized upon you
& borne you away a captive. Whilst you were in Rome, giving judicial decisions to the
whole Christian world in that famous College, the Rota of Auditors, there was added the
duty of acting on the Tuscan Imperial Legation at the Court of the Roman Pontiff. Sud-
denly you were appointed coadjutor to the Archbishop of Malines in the administration of
that great church, & his future successor. Hardly had you entered upon the duties of
that most distinguished appointment, than you were despatched by the August Empress of
the Romans as Legate on a mission of the greatest importance. You occupied yourself on
this mission for the space of five years, to the entire approbation of both Courts, & then
the wealthy church of Vacz obtained your services. Whilst there, the great distractions of
a life at Court being left behind, you administer the offices of religion & discharge the
sacred rights with that moderation of spirit & humility that befits a Christian prelate, in
charity towards the whole race of mankind, with a singularly attentive care. So that not
only that city & the district in its see, but the whole realm of Hungary as well, has looked
upon you, though of foreign race, as one of her own citizens ; nay, rather as a well beloved
father, whom she still mourns & sorrows for, now that you have been taken from her.
For, after less than a year had passed, she sees you recalled by the August Empress herself to
this Imperial City, the seat of a long line of Emperors, & the capital of the Dominions of
Austria, a worthy stage for the display of your great talents ; she sees you appointed, under
the auspices of the authority of the Roman Pontiff, to this exalted Archiepiscopal see.
Here too, sustaining with the utmost diligence the part you play so well, you throw your-
self heart and soul into the business of discharging the weighty duties of your priesthood,
or in attending to all those things that deal with the sacred rites with your own hands : so
much so that we often see you officiating, & even administering the Sacraments, in our

8 EPISTOLA AUCTORIS DEDICATORIA PRI1VLE EDITIONIS VIENNENSIS

haec nostra tempora exemplo, & publico operatum, ac ipsa etiam Sacramenta administrantem
videamus in templis, & Tua ipsius voce populos, e superiore loco docentum audiamus, atque
ad omne virtutum genus inflammantem.

Novi ego quidem haec omnia ; novi hanc indolem, hanc animi constitutionem ; nee
sum tamen inde absterritus, ne, inter gravissimas istas Tuas Sacerdotales curas, Philosophicas
hasce meditationes meas, Tibi sisterem, ac tantulae libellum molis homini ad tantum culmen
evecto porrigerem, ac Tuo vellem Nomine insignitum. Quod enim ad primum pertinet
caput, non Theologicas tantum, sed Philosophicas etiam perquisitiones Christiano Antistite
ego quidem dignissimas esse censeo, & universam Naturae contemplationem omnino
arbitror cum Sacerdotii sanctitate penitus consentire. Mirum enim, quam belle ab ipsa
consideratione Naturae ad caslestium rerum contemplationem disponitur animus, & ad
ipsum Divinum tantae molis Conditorem assurgit, infinitam ejus Potentiam Sapientiam,
Providentiam admiratus, quae erumpunt undique, & utique se produnt.

Est autem & illud, quod ad supremi sacrorum Moderatoris curam pertinet providere,
ne in prima ingenuae juventutis institutione, quae semper a naturalibus studiis exordium
ducit, prava teneris mentibus irrepant, ac perniciosa principia, quae sensim Religionem
corrumpant, & vero etiam evertant penitus, ac eruant a fundamentis ; quod quidem jam
dudum tristi quodam Europae fato passim evenire cernimus, gliscente in dies malo, ut fucatis
quibusdam, profecto perniciosissimis, imbuti principiis juvenes, turn demum sibi sapere
videantur, cum & omnem animo religionem, & Deum ipsum sapientissimum Mundi
Fabricatorem, atque Moderatorem sibi mente excusserint. Quamobrem qui veluti ad
tribunal tanti Sacerdotum Principis Universae Physicae Theoriam, & novam potissimum
Theoriam sistat, rem is quidem praestet sequissimam, nee alienum quidpiam ab ejus munere
Sacerdotali offerat, sed cum eodem apprime consentiens.

Nee vero exigua libelli moles deterrere me debuit, ne cum eo ad tantum Principem
accederem. Est ille quidem satis tenuis libellus, at non & tenuem quoque rem continet.
Argumentum pertractat sublime admodum, & nobile, in quo illustrando omnem ego quidem
industriam coUocavi, ubi si quid praestitero, si minus infiliclter me gessero, nemo sane me
impudentiae arguat, quasi vilem aliquam, & tanto indignam fastigio rem offeram. Habetur
in eo novum quoddam Universae Naturalis Philosophiae genus a receptis hue usque, usi-
tatisque plurimam discrepans, quanquam etiam ex iis, quae maxime omnium per haec tempora
celebrantur, casu quodam praecipua quasque mirum sane in modum compacta, atque inter
se veluti coagmentata conjunguntur ibidem, uti sunt simplicia atque inextensa Leibnitian-
orum elementa, cum Newtoni viribus inducentibus in aliis distantiis accessum mutuum, in
aliis mutuum recessum, quas vulgo attractiones, & repulsiones appellant : casu, inquam :
neque enim ego conciliandi studio hinc, & inde decerpsi quaedam ad arbitrium selecta, quae
utcumque inter se componerem, atque compaginarem : sed omni praejudicio seposito, a
principiis exorsus inconcussis, & vero etiam receptis communiter, legitima ratiocinatione
usus, & continue conclusionum nexu deveni ad legem virium in Natura existentium unicam,
simplicem , continuam, quae mihi & constitutionem elementorum materiae, & Mechanicae
leges, & generales materiae ipsius proprietates, & praecipua corporum discrimina, sua
applicatione ita exhibuit, ut eadem in iis omnibus ubique se prodat uniformis agendi ratio,
non ex arbitrariis hypothesibus, & fictitiis commentationibus, sed ex sola continua ratio-
cinatione deducta. Ejusmodi autem est omnis, ut eas ubique vel definiat, vel adumbret
combinationes elementorum, quae ad diversa prasstanda phaenomena sunt adhibendas, ad
quas combinationes Conditoris Supremi consilium, & immensa Mentis Divinae vis ubique
requiritur, quae infinites casus perspiciat, & ad rem aptissimos seligat, ac in Naturam
inducat.

Id mihi quidem argumentum est operis, in quo Theoriam meam expono, comprobo,
vindico : turn ad Mechanicam primum, deinde ad Physicam applico, & uberrimos usus
expono, ubi brevi quidem libello, sed admodum diuturnas annorum jam tredecim medita-
tiones complector meas, eo plerumque tantummodo rem deducens, ubi demum cum

AUTHOR'S EPISTLE DEDICATING THE FIRST VIENNA EDITION 9

churches (a somewhat unusual thing at the present time), and also hear you with your own
voice exhorting the people from your episcopal throne, & inciting them to virtue of
every kind.

I am well aware of all this ; I know full well the extent of your genius, & your con-
stitution of mind ; & yet I am not afraid on that account of putting into your hands,
amongst all those weighty duties of your priestly office, these philosophical meditations of
mine ; nor of offering a volume so inconsiderable in bulk to one who has attained to such
heights of eminence ; nor of desiring that it should bear the hall-mark of your name. With
regard to the first of these heads, I think that not only theological but also philosophical
investigations are quite suitable matters for consideration by a Christian prelate ; & in
my opinion, a contemplation of all the works of Nature is in complete accord with the
sanctity of the priesthood. For it is marvellous how exceedingly prone the mind becomes
to pass from a contemplation of Nature herself to the contemplation of celestial, things, &
to give honour to the Divine Founder of such a mighty structure, lost in astonishment at
His infinite Power & Wisdom & Providence, which break forth & disclose themselves
in all directions & in all things.

There is also this further point, that it is part of the duty of a religious superior to take
care that, in the earliest training of ingenuous youth, which always takes its start from the
study of the wonders of Nature, improper ideas do not insinuate themselves into tender
minds ; or such pernicious principles as may gradually corrupt the belief in things Divine,
nay, even destroy it altogether, & uproot it from its very foundations. This is what we
have seen for a long time taking place, by some unhappy decree of adverse fate, all over
Europe ; and, as the canker spreads at an ever increasing rate, young men, who have been
made to imbibe principles that counterfeit the truth but are actually most pernicious doc-
trines, do not think that they have attained to wisdom until they have banished from their
minds all thoughts of religion and of God, the All- wise Founder and Supreme Head of the
Universe. Hence, one who so to speak sets before the judgment-seat of such a prince of
the priesthood as yourself a theory of general Physical Science, & more especially one that
is new, is doing nothing but what is absolutely correct. Nor would he be offering him
anything inconsistent with his priestly office, but on the contrary one that is in complete
harmony with it.

Nor, secondly, should the inconsiderable size of my little book deter me from approach-
ing with it so great a prince. It is true that the volume of the book is not very great, but
the matter that it contains is not unimportant as well. The theory it develops is a strik-
ingly sublime and noble idea ; & I have done my very best to explain it properly. If in
this I have somewhat succeeded, if I have not failed altogether, let no one accuse me of
presumption, as if I were offering some worthless thing, something unworthy of such dis-
tinguished honour. In it is contained a new kind of Universal Natural Philosophy, one that
differs widely from any that are generally accepted & practised at the present time ;
although it so happens that the principal points of all the most distinguished theories of the
present day, interlocking and as it were cemented together in a truly marvellous way, are
combined in it ; so too are the simple unextended elements of the followers of Leibniz,
as well as the Newtonian forces producing mutual approach at 'some distances & mutual
separation at others, usually called attractions and repulsions. I use the words " it so
happens " because I have not, in eagerness to make the whole consistent, selected one thing
here and another there, just as it suited me for the purpose of making them agree & form
a connected whole. On the contrary, I put on one side all prejudice, & started from
fundamental principles that are incontestable, & indeed are those commonly accepted ; I
used perfectly sound arguments, & by a continuous chain of deduction I arrived at a
single, simple, continuous law for the forces that exist in Nature. The application of this
law explained to me the constitution of the elements of matter, the laws of Mechanics, the
general properties of matter itself, & the chief characteristics of bodies, in such a manner
that the same uniform method of action in all things disclosed itself at all points ; being
deduced, not from arbitrary hypotheses, and fictitibus explanations, but from a single con-
tinuous chain of reasoning. Moreover it is in all its parts of such a kind as defines, or
suggests, in every case, the combinations of the elements that must be employed to produce
different phenomena. For these combinations the wisdom of the Supreme Founder of the
Universe, & the mighty power of a Divine Mind are absolutely necessary ; naught but
one that could survey the countless cases, select those most suitable for the purpose, and
introduce them into the scheme of Nature.

This then is the argument of my work, in which I explain, prove & defend my theory ;
then I apply it, in the first instance to Mechanics, & afterwards to Physics, & set forth
the many advantages to be derived from it. Here, although the book is but small, I yet
include the well-nigh daily meditations of the last thirteen years, carrying on my conclu-

io EPISTOLA AUCTORIS DEDICATORIA PRIM.£ EDITIONIS VIENNENSIS

communibus Philosophorum consentio placitis, & ubi ea, quae habemus jam pro compertis,
ex meis etiam deductionibus sponte fluunt, quod usque adeo voluminis molem contraxit.
Dederam ego quidem dispersa dissertatiunculis variis Theorise meae qusedam velut specimina,
quae inde & in Italia Professores publicos nonnullos adstipulatores est nacta, & jam ad
exteras quoque gentes pervasit ; sed ea nunc primum tota in unum compacta, & vero etiam
plusquam duplo aucta, prodit in publicum, quern laborem postremo hoc mense, molestiori-
bus negotiis, quae me Viennam adduxerant, & curis omnibus exsolutus suscepi, dum in
Italiam rediturus opportunam itineri tempus inter assiduas nives opperior, sed omnem in
eodem adornando, & ad communem mediocrum etiam Philosophorum captum accommo-
dando diligentiam adhibui.

Inde vero jam facile intelliges, cur ipsum laborem meum ad Te deferre, & Tuo
nuncupare Nomini non dubitaverim. Ratio ex iis, quae proposui, est duplex : primo quidem
ipsum argumenti genus, quod Christianum Antistitem non modo non dedecet, sed etiam
apprime decet : turn ipsius argumenti vis, atque dignitas, quae nimirum confirmat, & erigit
nimium fortasse impares, sed quantum fieri per me potuit, intentos conatus meos ; nam
quidquid eo in genere meditando assequi possum, totum ibidem adhibui, ut idcirco nihil
arbitrer a mea tenuitate proferri posse te minus indignum, cui ut aliquem offerrem laborum
meorum fructum quantumcunque, exposcebat sane, ac ingenti clamore quodam efnagitabat
tanta erga me humanitas Tua, qua jam olim immerentem complexus Romae, hie etiam
fovere pergis, nee in tanto dedignatus fastigio, omni benevolentiae significatione prosequeris.
Accedit autem & illud, quod in hisce terris vix adhuc nota, vel etiam ignota penitus Theoria
mea Patrocinio indiget, quod, si Tuo Nomine insignata prodeat in publicum, obtinebit sane
validissimum, & secura vagabitur : Tu enim illam, parente velut hie orbatam suo, in dies
nimirum discessuro, & quodammodo veluti posthumam post ipsum ejus discessum typis
impressam, & in publicum prodeuntem tueberis, fovebisque.

Haec sunt, quae meum Tibi consilium probent, Princeps Celsissime : Tu, qua soles
humanitate auctorem excipere, opus excipe, & si forte adhuc consilium ipsum Tibi visum
fuerit improbandum ; animum saltern aequus respice obsequentissimum Tibi, ac devinct-
issimum. Vale.

Dabam Viennce in Collegia Academico Soc. JESU
Idibus Febr. MDCCLFIIL

AUTHOR'S EPISTLE DEDICATING THE FIRST VIENNA EDITION 11

sions for the most part only up to the point where I finally agreed with the opinions com-
monly held amongst philosophers, or where theories, now accepted as established, are the
natural results of my deductions also ; & this has in some measure helped to diminish the
size of the volume. I had already published some instances, so to speak, of my general
theory in several short dissertations issued at odd times ; & on that account the theory
has found some supporters amongst the university professors in Italy, & has already made
its way into foreign countries. But now for the first time is it published as a whole in a
single volume, the matter being indeed more than doubled in amount. This work I have
carried out during the last month, being quit of the troublesome business that brought me
to Vienna, and of all other cares ; whilst I wait for seasonable time for my return journey
through the everlasting snow to Italy. I have however used my utmost endeavours in
preparing it, and adapting it to the ordinary intelligence of philosophers of only moderate
attainments.

From this you will readily understand why I have not hesitated to bestow this book
of mine upon you, & to dedicate it to you. My reason, as can be seen from what I have
said, was twofold ; in the first place, the nature of my theme is one that is not only not
unsuitable, but is suitable in a high degree, for the consideration of a Christian priest ;
secondly, the power & dignity of the theme itself, which doubtless gives strength &
vigour to my efforts — perchance rather feeble, but, as far as in me lay, earnest. What-
ever in that respect I could gain by the exercise of thought, I have applied the whole of it
to this matter ; & consequently I think that nothing less unworthy of you can be pro-
duced by my poor ability ; & that I should offer to you some such fruit of my labours
was surely required of me, & as it were clamorously demanded by your great kindness
to me ; long ago in Rome you had enfolded my unworthy self in it, & here now you
continue to be my patron, & do not disdain, from your exalted position, to honour me
with every mark of your goodwill. There is still a further consideration, namely, that my
Theory is as yet almost, if not quite, unknown in these parts, & therefore needs a patron's
support ; & this it will obtain most effectually, & will go on its way in security if it
comes before the public franked with your name. For you will protect & cherish it,
on its publication here, bereaved as it were of that parent whose departure in truth draws
nearer every day ; nay rather posthumous, since it will be seen in print only after he has
gone.

Such are my grounds for hoping that you will approve my idea, most High Prince.
I beg you to receive the work with the same kindness as you used to show to its author ;
&, if perchance the idea itself should fail to meet with your approval, at least regard
favourably the intentions of your most humble & devoted servant. Farewell.

University College of the Society of Jesus,
VIENNA,

February i$th, 1758.

AD LECTOREM

EX EDITIONS VIENNENSI

amice Lector, Philosophic Naturalis Theoriam ex unica lege virium
deductam, quam & ubi jam olim adumbraverim, vel etiam ex parte explica-
verim, y qua occasione nunc uberius pertractandum, atque augendam etiam,
susceperim, invenies in ipso -primes •partis exordia. Libuit autem hoc opus
dividere in partes tres, quarum prima continet explicationem Theories ipsius,
ac ejus analyticam deductionem, & vindicationem : secunda applicationem-
satis uberem ad Mechanicam ; tertia applicationem ad Physicam.

Porro illud inprimis curandum duxi, ut omnia, quam liceret, dilucide exponerentur, nee
sublimiore Geometria, aut Calculo indigerent. Et quidem in prima, ac tertia parte non tantum
nullcs analyticee, sed nee geometries demonstrations occurrunt, paucissimis qiiibusdam, quibus
indigeo, rejectis in adnotatiunculas, quas in fine paginarum quarundam invenies. Queedam
autem admodum pauca, quce majorem Algebra, & Geometries cognitionem requirebant, vel erant
complicatiora aliquando, & alibi a me jam edita, in fine operis apposui, quce Supplementorum
appellavi nomine, ubi W ea addidi, quce sentio de spatio, ac tempore, Theories mece consentanea,
ac edita itidem jam alibi. In secunda parte, ubi ad Mechanicam applicatur Theoria,a geome-
tricis, W aliquando etiam ab algebraicis demonstrationibus abstinere omnino non potui ; sed
ece ejusmodi sunt, ut vix unquam requirant aliud, quam Euclideam Geometriam, & primas
Trigonometries notiones maxime simplices, ac simplicem algorithmum.

In prima quidem parte occurrunt Figures geometricce complures, quce prima fronte vide-
buntur etiam complicate? rem ipsam intimius non perspectanti ; verum ece nihil aliud exhibent,
nisi imaginem quandam rerum, quce ipsis oculis per ejusmodi figuras sistuntur contemplandce.
Ejusmodi est ipsa ilia curva, quce legem virium exhibet. Invenio ego quidem inter omnia
materice puncta vim quandam mutuam, quce a distantiis pendet, £5" mutatis distantiis mutatur
ita, ut in aliis attractiva sit, in aliis repulsiva, sed certa quadam, y continua lege. Leges
ejusmodi variationis binarum quantitatum a se invicem pendentium, uti Jiic sunt distantia,
y vis, exprimi possunt vel per analyticam formulam, vel per geometricam curvam ; sed ilia
prior expressio & multo plures cognitiones requirit ad Algebram pertinentes, & imaginationem
non ita adjuvat, ut heec posterior, qua idcirco sum usus in ipsa prima operis parte, rejecta in
Supplementa formula analytica, quce y curvam, & legem virium ab ilia expressam exhibeat.

Porro hue res omnis reducitur. Habetur in recta indefinita, quce axis dicitur, punctum
quoddam, a quo abscissa ipsius rectce segmenta referunt distantias. Curva linea protenditur
secundum rectam ipsam, circa quam etiam serpit, y eandem in pluribus secat punctis : rectce
a fine segmentorum erectce perpendiculariter usque ad curvam, exprimunt vires, quce majores
sunt, vel minores, prout ejusmodi rectce sunt itidem majores, vel minores ; ac eesdem ex attrac-
tivis migrant in repulsivis, vel vice versa, ubi illce ipsce perpendiculares rectce directionem
mutant, curva ab alter a axis indefiniti plaga migrante ad alter am. Id quidem nullas requirit
geometricas demonstrations, sed meram cognitionem vocum quarundam, quce vel ad prima per-
tinent Geometries elementa, y notissimce sunt, vel ibi explicantur, ubi adhibentur. Notissima
autem etiam est significatio vocis Asymptotus, unde & crus asymptoticum curvce appellatur ;
dicitur nimirum recta asymptotus cruris cujuspiam curvce, cum ipsa recta in infinitum producta,
ita ad curvilineum arcum productum itidem in infinitum semper accedit magis, ut distantia
minuatur in infinitum, sed nusquam penitus evanescat, illis idcirco nunquam invicem con-
venientibus.

Consider atio porro attenta curvce propositce in Fig. I, &rationis, qua per illam exprimitur

12

THE PREFACE TO THE READER

THAT APPEARED IN THE VIENNA EDITION

EAR Reader, you have before you a Theory of Natural Philosophy deduced
from a single law of Forces. You will find in the opening paragraphs of
the first section a statement as to where the Theory has been already
published in outline, & to a certain extent explained ; & also the occasion
that led me to undertake a more detailed treatment & enlargement of it.
For I have thought fit to divide the work into three parts ; the first of
these contains the exposition of the Theory itself, its analytical deduction
& its demonstration ; the second a fairly full application to Mechanics ; & the third an
application to Physics.

The most important point, I decided, was for me to take the greatest care that every-
thing, as far as was possible, should be clearly explained, & that there should be no need for
higher geometry or for the calculus. Thus, in the first part, as well as in the third, there
are no proofs by analysis ; nor are there any by geometry, with the exception of a very few
that are absolutely necessary, & even these you will find relegated to brief notes set at the
foot of a page. I have also added some very few proofs, that required a knowledge of
higher algebra & geometry, or were of a rather more complicated nature, all of which have
been already published elsewhere, at the end of the work ; I have collected these under
the heading Supplements ; & in them I have included my views on Space & Time, which
are in accord with my main Theory, & also have been already published elsewhere. In
the second part, where the Theory is applied to Mechanics, I have not been able to do
without geometrical proofs altogether ; & even in some cases I have had to give algebraical
proofs. But these are of such a simple kind that they scarcely ever require anything more
than Euclidean geometry, the first and most elementary ideas of trigonometry, and easy
analytical calculations.

It is true that in the first part there are to be found a good many geometrical diagrams,
which at first sight, before the text is considered more closely, will appear to be rather
complicated. But these present nothing else but a kind of image of the subjects treated,
which by means of these diagrams are set before the eyes for contemplation. The very
curve that represents the law of forces is an instance of this. I find that between all points
of matter there is a mutual force depending on the distance between them, & changing as
this distance changes ; so that it is sometimes attractive, & sometimes repulsive, but always
follows a definite continuous law. Laws of variation of this kind between two quantities
depending upon one another, as distance & force do in this instance, may be represented
either by an analytical formula or by a geometrical curve ; but the former method of
representation requires far more knowledge of algebraical processes, & does not assist the
imagination in the way that the latter does. Hence I have employed the latter method in
the first part of the work, & relegated to the Supplements the analytical formula which
represents the curve, & the law of forces which the curve exhibits.

The whole matter reduces to this. In a straight line of indefinite length, which is
called the axis, a fixed point is taken ; & segments of the straight line cut off from this
point represent the distances. A curve is drawn following the general direction of this
straight line, & winding about it, so as to cut it in several places. Then perpendiculars that
are drawn from the ends of the segments to meet the curve represent the forces ; these
forces are greater or less, according as such perpendiculars are greater or less ; & they pass
from attractive forces to repulsive, and vice versa, whenever these perpendiculars change
their direction, as the curve passes from one side of the axis of indefinite length to the other
side of it. Now this requires no geometrical proof, but only a knowledge of certain terms,
which either belong to the first elementary principles of "geometry, & are thoroughly well
known, or are such as can be defined when they are used. The term Asymptote is well
known, and from the same idea we speak of the branch of a curve as being asymptotic ;
thus a straight line is said to be the asymptote to any branch of a curve when, if the straight
line is indefinitely produced, it approaches nearer and nearer to the curvilinear arc which
is also prolonged indefinitely in such manner that the distance between them becomes
indefinitely diminished, but never altogether vanishes, so that the straight line & the curve
never really meet.

A careful consideration of the curve given in Fig. I, & of the way in which the relation

14 AD LECTOREM EX EDITIONE VIENNENSI

nexus inter vires, y distantias, est utique admodum necessaria ad intelligendam Theoriam ipsam,
cujus ea est prcecipua qucedam veluti clavis, sine qua omnino incassum tentarentur cetera ; sed
y ejusmodi est, ut tironum, & sane etiam mediocrium, immo etiam longe infra mediocritatem
collocatorum, captum non excedat, potissimum si viva accedat Professoris vox mediocriter etiam
versati in Mechanica, cujus ope, pro certo habeo, rem ita patentem omnibus reddi posse, ut
ii etiam, qui Geometric penitus ignari sunt, paucorum admodum explicatione vocabulorum
accidente, earn ipsis oculis intueantur omnino perspicuam.

In tertia parte supponuntur utique nonnulla, quce demonstrantur in secunda ; sed ea ipsa
sunt admodum pauca, & Us, qui geometricas demonstrationes fastidiunt, facile admodum exponi
possunt res ipsce ita, ut penitus etiam sine ullo Geometries adjumento percipiantur, quanquam
sine Us ipsa demonstratio baberi non poterit ; ut idcirco in eo differre debeat is, qui secundam
partem attente legerit, & Geometriam calleat, ab eo, qui earn omittat, quod ille primus veritates
in tertia parte adhibitis, ac ex secunda erutas, ad, explicationem Physicce, intuebitur per evi-
dentiam ex ipsis demonstrationibus haustam, hie secundus easdem quodammodo per fidem Geo-
metris adhibitam credet. Hujusmodi inprimis est illud, particulam compositam ex punctis
etiam homogeneis, prceditis lege virium proposita, posse per solam diversam ipsorum punctorum
dispositionem aliam particulam per certum intervallum vel perpetuo attrahere, vel perpetuo
repellere, vel nihil in earn agere, atque id ipsum viribus admodum diversis, y quce respectu diver-
sarum particularum diver see sint, & diver see respectu partium diver sarum ejusdem particulce,
ac aliam particulam alicubi etiam urgeant in latus, unde plurium phcenomenorum explicatio in
Physica sponte fluit.

Verum qui omnem Theories, y deductionum compagem aliquanto altius inspexerit, ac
diligentius perpenderit, videbit, ut spero, me in hoc perquisitionis genere multo ulterius
progressum esse, quam olim Newtonus ipse desideravit. Is enim in postremo Opticce questione
prolatis Us, quce per vim attractivam, & vim repulsivam, mutata distantia ipsi attractive suc-
cedentem, explicari poterant, hcec addidit : " Atque hcec quidem omnia si ita sint, jam Natura
universa valde erit simplex, y consimilis sui, perficiens nimirum magnos omnes corporum
ccelestium motus attractione gravitatis, quce est mutua inter corpora ilia omnia, & minores fere
omnes particularum suarum motus alia aliqua vi attrahente, & repellente, qua est inter particulas
illas mutua" Aliquanto autem inferius de primigeniis particulis agens sic habet : " Porro
videntur mihi hce particulce primigenice non modo in se vim inertice habere, motusque leges passivas
illas, quce ex vi ista necessario oriuntur ; verum etiam motum perpetuo accipere a certis principiis
actuosis, qualia nimirum sunt gravitas, £ff causa fermentationis, & cohcerentia corporum. Atque
hcec quidem principia considero non ut occultas qualitates, quce ex specificis rerum formis oriri
fingantur, sed ut universales Naturce leges, quibus res ipsce sunt formatce. Nam principia
quidem talia revera existere ostendunt phenomena Naturce, licet ipsorum causce quce sint,
nondum fuerit explicatum. Affirmare, singulas rerum species specificis prceditas esse qualita-
tibus occultis, per quas eae vim certam in agenda habent, hoc utique est nihil dicere : at ex
phcenomenis Naturce duo, vel tria derivare generalia motus principia, & deinde explicare,
quemadmodum proprietates, & actiones rerum corporearum omnium ex istis principiis conse-
quantur, id vero magnus esset factus in Philosophia progressus, etiamsi principiorum istorum
causce nondum essent cognitce. Quare motus principia supradicta proponere non dubito, cum
per Naturam universam latissime pateant"

Hcec ibi Newtonus, ubi is quidem magnos in Philosophia progressus facturum arbitratus
est eum, qui ad duo, vel tria generalia motus principia ex Naturce phcenomenis derivata pheeno-
menorum explicationem reduxerit, & sua principia protulit, ex quibus inter se diversis eorum
aliqua tantummodo explicari posse censuit. Quid igitur, ubi tf? ea ipsa tria, & alia prcecipua
quceque, ut ipsa etiam impenetrabilitas, y impulsio reducantur ad principium unicum legitima
ratiocinatione deductum ? At id -per meam unicam, & simplicem virium legemprcestari, patebit
sane consideranti operis totius Synopsim quandam, quam hie subjicio ; sed multo magis opus
ipsum diligentius pervolventi.

THE PRINTER AT VENICE

TO

THE READER

\ OU will be well aware, if you have read the public journals, with what applause
the work which I now offer to you has been received throughout Europe
since its publication at Vienna five years ago. Not to mention others, if
you refer to the numbers of the Berne Journal for the early part of the
year 1761, you will not fail to see how highly it has been esteemed. It
contains an entirely new system of Natural Philosophy, which is already
commonly known as the Boscovichian theory, from the name of its author,
As a matter of fact, it is even now a subject of public instruction in several Universities in
different parts ; it is expounded not only in yearly theses or dissertations, both printed &
debated ; but also in several elementary books issued for the instruction of the young it is
introduced, explained, & by many considered as their original. Any one, however, who
wishes to obtain more detailed insight into the whole structure of the theory, the close
relation that its several parts bear to one another, or its great fertility & wide scope for
the purpose of deriving the whole of Nature, in her widest range, from a single simple law
of forces ; any one who wishes to make a deeper study of it must perforce study the work
here offered.

All these considerations had from the first moved me to undertake a new edition of
the work ; in addition, there was the fact that I perceived that it would be a matter of some
difficulty for copies of the Vienna edition to pass beyond the confines of Germany — indeed,
at the present time, no matter how diligently they are inquired for, they are to be found
on sale nowhere, or scarcely anywhere, in the rest of Europe. The system had its birth in
Italy, & its outlines had already been sketched by the author in several dissertations pub-
lished here in our own land ; though, as luck would have it, the system itself was finally
put into shape and published at Vienna, whither he had gone for a short time. I therefore
thought it right that it should be disseminated throughout the whole of Europe, & that
preferably as the product of an Italian press. I had in fact already commenced an edition
founded on a copy of the Vienna edition, when it came to my knowledge that the author
was greatly dissatisfied with the Vienna edition, taken in hand there after his departure ;
that innumerable printer's errors had crept in ; that many passages, especially those that
contain Algebraical formulae, were ill-arranged and erroneous ; lastly, that the author
himself had in mind a complete revision, including certain alterations, to give a better
finish to the work, together with certain additional matter.

That being the case, I was greatly desirous of obtaining a copy, revised & enlarged
by himself ; I also wanted to have him at hand whilst the edition was in progress, & that
he should superintend the whole thing for himself. This, however, I was unable to procure
during the last few years, in which he has been travelling through nearly the whole of
Europe ; until at last he came here, a little while ago, as he returned home from his lengthy
wanderings, & stayed here to assist me during the whole time that the edition was in
hand. He, in addition to our regular proof-readers, himself also used every care in cor-
recting the proof ; even then, however, he has not sufficient confidence in himself as to
imagine that not the slightest thing has escaped him. For it is a characteristic of the human
mind that it cannot concentrate long on the same subject with sufficient attention.

It follows that this ought to be considered in some measure as a first & original
edition ; any one who compares it with that issued at Vienna will soon see the difference
between them. Many of the minor alterations are made for the purpose of rendering
certain passages more elegant & clear ; there are, however, especially at the foot of a
page, slight additions also, or slight changes made after the type was set up, merely for
the purpose of filling up gaps that were left here & there — these gaps being due to the
fact that several sheets were being set at the same time by different compositors, and four
presses were kept hard at work together. As he was at hand, this could easily be done
without causing any disturbance of the sentences or the pagination.

14 AD LECTOREM EX EDITIONE VIENNENSI

nexus inter vires, & distantias, est utique admodum necessaria ad intelligendam Theoriam ipsam,
cujus ea est prcecipua queedam veluti clavis, sine qua omnino incassum tentarentur cetera ; sed
y ejusmodi est, ut tironum, & sane etiam mediocrium, immo etiam longe infra mediocritatem
collocatorum, captum non excedat, potissimum si viva accedat Professoris vox mediocriter etiam
versati in Mechanics, cujus ope, pro certo habeo, rem ita patentem omnibus reddi posse, ut
ii etiam, qui Geometric? penitus ignari sunt, paucorum admodum explicatione vocabulorum
accidente, earn ipsis oculis intueantur omnino perspicuam,

In tertia parte supponuntur utique nonnulla, que? demonstrantur in secunda ; sed ea ipsa
sunt admodum pauca, & Us, qui geometricas demonstrationes fastidiunt, facile admodum exponi
possunt res ipsee ita, ut penitus etiam sine ullo Geometric adjumento percipiantur, quanquam
sine Us ipsa demonstratio haberi non poterit ; ut idcirco in eo differre debeat is, qui secundam
partem attente legerit, y Geometriam calleat, ab eo, qui earn omittat, quod ille primus veritates
in tertia parte adhibitis, ac ex secunda erutas, ad explicationem Physics, intuebitur per evi-
dentiam ex ipsis demonstrationibus baustam, hie secundus easdem quodammodo per fidem Geo-
metris adhibitam credet. Hujusmodi inprimis est illud, particulam compositam ex punctis
etiam bomogeneis, preeditis lege virium proposita, posse per solam diversam ipsorum punctorum
dispositionem aliam particulam per cerium intervallum vel perpetuo attrahere, vel perpetuo
repellere, vel nihil in earn agere, atque id ipsum viribus admodum diversis, y que? respectu diver-
sarum particularum diver see sint, y diverse? respectu partium diver sarum ejusdem particulce,
ac aliam particulam alicubi etiam urgeant in latus, unde plurium pheenomenorum explicatio in
Physica sponte ftuit.

Ferum qui omnem Theorie?, y deductionum compagem aliquanto altius inspexerit, ac
diligentius perpenderit, videbit, ut spero, me in hoc perquisitionis genere multo ulterius
progressum esse, quam olim Newtonus ipse desideravit. Is enim in postremo Opticce questione
prolatis Us, qua per vim attractivam, y vim repulsivam, mutata distantia ipsi attractive? suc-
cedentem, explicari poterant, he?c addidit : " Atque he?c quidem omnia si ita sint, jam Natura
universa valde erit simplex, y consimilis sui, perficiens nimirum magnos omnes corporum
ccelestium motus attractione gravitatis, quee est mutua inter corpora ilia omnia, y minores fere
omnes particularum suarum motus alia aliqua vi attrabente, y repellente, quiz est inter particulas
illas mutua." Aliquanto autem inferius de primigeniis particulis agens sic habet : " Porro
videntur mihi he? particule? primigeniee non modo in se vim inertice habere, motusque leges passivas
illas, que? ex vi ista necessario oriuntur ; verum etiam motum perpetuo accipere a certis principiis
actuosis, qualia nimirum sunt gravitas, y causa fermentationis, y cohcerentia corporum. Atque
heec quidem principia considero non ut occultas qualitates, que? ex specificis rerum formis oriri
fingantur, sed ut universales Nature? leges, quibus res ipse? sunt formates. Nam principia
quidem talia revera existere ostendunt phenomena Nature?, licet ipsorum cause? que? sint,
nondum fuerit explicatum. Affirmare, singulas rerum species specificis preeditas esse qualita-
tibus occultis, per quas eae vim certam in agenda habent, hoc utique est nihil dicere : at ex
phcenomenis Nature? duo, vel tria derivare generalia motus principia, y deinde explicare,
quemadmodum proprietates, y actiones rerum corporearum omnium ex istis principiis conse-
quantur, id vero magnus esset factus in Philosophia progressus, etiamsi principiorum istorum
cause? nondum essent cognite?. Quare motus principia supradicta proponere non dubito, cum
per Naturam universam latissime pateant"

Hc?c ibi Newtonus, ubi is quidem magnos in Philosophia progressus facturum arbitratus
est eum, qui ad duo, vel tria generalia motus principia ex Nature? pheenomenis derivata phe?no-
menorum explicationem reduxerit, y sua principia protulit, ex quibus inter se diversis eorum
aliqua tantummodo explicari posse censuit. Quid igitur, ubi y ea ipsa tria, y alia preecipua
quczque, ut ipsa etiam impenetrabilitas, y impulsio reducantur ad principium unicum legitima
ratiocinatione deductum ? At id per meam unicam, y simplicem virium legempr<zstari,patebit
sane consideranti operis totius Synopsim quandam, quam hie subjicio ; sed multo magis opus
ipsum diligentius pervolventi.

THE PRINTER AT VENICE

TO

THE READER

|JOU will be well aware, if you have read the public journals, with what applause
the work which I now offer to you has been received throughout Europe
since its publication at Vienna five years ago. Not to mention others, if
you refer to the numbers of the Berne Journal for the early part of the
year 1761, you will not fail to see how highly it has been esteemed. It
contains an entirely new system of Natural Philosophy, which is already
commonly known as the Boscovicbian theory, from the name of its author,
As a matter of fact, it is even now a subject of public instruction in several Universities in
different parts ; it is expounded not only in yearly theses or dissertations, both printed &
debated ; but also in several elementary books issued for the instruction of the young it is
introduced, explained, & by many considered as their original. Any one, however, who
wishes to obtain more detailed insight into the whole structure of the theory, the close
relation that its several parts bear to one another, or its great fertility & wide scope for
the purpose of deriving the whole of Nature, in her widest range, from a single simple law
of forces ; any one who wishes to make a deeper study of it must perforce study the work
here offered.

All these considerations had from the first moved me to undertake a new edition of
the work ; in addition, there was the fact that I perceived that it would be a matter of some
difficulty for copies of the Vienna edition to pass beyond the confines of Germany — indeed,
at the present time, no matter how diligently they are inquired for, they are to be found
on sale nowhere, or scarcely anywhere, in the rest of Europe. The system had its birth in
Italy, & its outlines had already been sketched by the author in several dissertations pub-
lished here in our own land ; though, as luck would have it, the system itself was finally
put into shape and published at Vienna, whither he had gone for a short time. I therefore
thought it right that it should be disseminated throughout the whole of Europe, & that
preferably as the product of an Italian press. I had in fact already commenced an edition
founded on a copy of the Vienna edition, when it came to my knowledge that the author
was greatly dissatisfied with the Vienna edition, taken in hand there after his departure ;
that innumerable printer's errors had crept in ; that many passages, especially those that
contain Algebraical formulae, were ill-arranged and erroneous ; lastly, that the author
himself had in mind a complete revision, including certain alterations, to give a better
finish to the work, together with certain additional matter.

That being the case, I was greatly desirous of obtaining a copy, revised & enlarged
by himself ; I also wanted to have him at hand whilst the edition was in progress, & that
he should superintend the whole thing for himself. This, however, I was unable to procure
during the last few years, in which he has been travelling through nearly the whole of
Europe ; until at last he came here, a little while ago, as he returned home from his lengthy
wanderings, & stayed here to assist me during the whole time that the edition was in
hand. He, in addition to our regular proof-readers, himself also used every care in cor-
recting the proof ; even then, however, he has not sufficient confidence in himself as to
imagine that not the slightest thing has escaped him. For it is a characteristic of the human
mind that it cannot concentrate long on the same subject with sufficient attention.

It follows that this ought to be considered in some measure as a first & original
edition ; any one who compares it with that issued at Vienna will soon see the difference
between them. Many of the minor alterations are made for the purpose of rendering
certain passages more elegant & clear ; there are, however, especially at the foot of a
page, slight additions also, or slight changes made after the type was set up, merely for
the purpose of filling up gaps that were left here & there — these gaps being due to the
fact that several sheets were being set at the same time by different compositors, and four
presses were kept hard at work together. As he was at hand, this could easily be done
without causing any disturbance of the sentences or the pagination.

4 TYPOGRAPHUS VENETUS LECTORI

Inter mutationes occurret ordo numerorum mutatus in paragraphis : nam numerus 82
de novo accessit totus : deinde is, qui fuerat 261 discerptus est in 5 ; demum in Appendice
post num. 534 factae sunt & mutatiunculae nonnullae, & additamenta plura in iis, quae
pertinent ad sedem animse.

Supplementorum ordo mutatus est itidem ; quae enim fuerant 3, & 4, jam sunt i, &
2 : nam eorum usus in ipso Opere ante alia occurrit. UK autem, quod prius fuerat primum,
nunc autem est tertium, accessit in fine Scholium tertium, quod pluribus numeris complec-
titur dissertatiunculam integrant de argumento, quod ante aliquot annos in Parisiensi
Academia controversiae occasionem exhibuit in Encyclopedico etiam dictionario attactum,
in qua dissertatiuncula demonstrat Auctor non esse, cur ad vim exprimendam potentia
quaepiam distantice adhibeatur potius, quam functio.

Accesserunt per totum Opus notulae marginales, in quibus eorum, quae pertractantur
argumenta exponuntur brevissima, quorum ope unico obtutu videri possint omnia, & in
memoriam facile revocari.

Postremo loco ad calcem Operis additus est fusior catalogus eorum omnium, quae hue
usque ab ipso Auctore sunt edita, quorum collectionem omnem expolitam, & correctam,
ac eorum, quse nondum absoluta sunt, continuationem meditatur, aggressurus illico post
suum regressum in Urbem Romam, quo properat. Hie catalogus impressus fuit Venetisis
ante hosce duos annos in reimpressione ejus poematis de Solis ac Lunae defectibus.
Porro earn omnium suorum Operum Collectionem, ubi ipse adornaverit, typis ego meis
excudendam suscipiam, quam magnificentissime potero.

Haec erant, quae te monendum censui ; tu laboribus nostris fruere, & vive felix.

THE PREFACE TO THE READER

THAT APPEARED IN THE VIENNA EDITION

Reader, you have before you a Theory of Natural Philosophy deduced
from a single law of Forces. You will find in the opening paragraphs of
the first section a statement as to where the Theory has been already
published in outline, & to a certain extent explained ; & also the occasion
that led me to undertake a more detailed treatment & enlargement of it.
For I have thought fit to divide the work into three parts ; the first of
these contains the exposition of the Theory itself, its analytical deduction
& its demonstration ; the second a fairly full application to Mechanics ; & the third an
application to Physics.

The most important point, I decided, was for me to take the greatest care that every-
thing, as far as was possible, should be clearly explained, & that there should be no need for
higher geometry or for the calculus. Thus, in the first part, as well as in the third, there
are no proofs by analysis ; nor are there any by geometry, with the exception of a very few
that are absolutely necessary, & even these you will find relegated to brief notes set at the
foot of a page. I have also added some very few proofs, that required a knowledge of
higher algebra & geometry, or were of a rather more complicated nature, all of which have
been already published elsewhere, at the end of the work ; I have collected these under
the heading Supplements ; & in them I have included my views on Space & Time, which
are in accord with my main Theory, & also have been already published elsewhere. In
the second part, where the Theory is applied to Mechanics, I have not been able to do
without geometrical proofs altogether ; & even in some cases I have had to give algebraical
proofs. But these are of such a simple kind that they scarcely ever require anything more
than Euclidean geometry, the first and most elementary ideas of trigonometry, and easy
analytical calculations.

It is true that in the first part there are to be found a good many geometrical diagrams,
which at first sight, before the text is considered more closely, will appear to be rather
complicated. But these present nothing else but a kind of image of the subjects treated,
which by means of these diagrams are set before the eyes for contemplation. The very
curve that represents the law of forces is an instance of this. I find that between all points
of matter there is a mutual force depending on the distance between them, & changing as
this distance changes ; so that it is sometimes attractive, & sometimes repulsive, but always
follows a definite continuous law. Laws of variation of this kind between two quantities
depending upon one another, as distance & force do in this instance, may be represented
either by an analytical formula or by a geometrical curve ; but the former method of
representation requires far more knowledge of algebraical processes, & does not assist the
imagination in the way that the latter does. Hence I have employed the latter method in
the first part of the work, & relegated to the Supplements the analytical formula which
represents the curve, & the law of forces which the curve exhibits.

The whole matter reduces to this. In a straight line of indefinite length, which is
called the axis, a fixed point is taken ; & segments of the straight line cut off from this
point represent the distances. A curve is drawn following the general direction of this
straight line, & winding about it, so as to cut it in several places. Then perpendiculars that
are drawn from the ends of the segments to meet the curve represent the forces ; these
forces are greater or less, according as such perpendiculars are greater or less ; & they pass
from attractive forces to repulsive, and vice versa, whenever these perpendiculars change
their direction, as the curve passes from one side of the axis of indefinite length to the other
side of it. Now this requires no geometrical proof, but only a knowledge of certain terms,
which either belong to the first elementary principles of geometry, & are thoroughly well
known, or are such as can be defined when they are used. The term Asymptote is well
known, and from the same idea we speak of the branch of a curve as being asymptotic ;
thus a straight line is said to be the asymptote to any branch of a curve when, if the straight
line is indefinitely produced, it approaches nearer and nearer to the curvilinear arc which
is also prolonged indefinitely in such manner that the distance between them becomes
indefinitely diminished, but never altogether vanishes, so that the straight line & the curve
never really meet.

A careful consideration of the curve given in Fig. I, & of the way in which the relation

13

i4 AD LECTOREM EX EDITIONE VIENNENSI

nexus inter vires, & distantias, est utique ad.rn.odum necessaria ad intelligendam Theoriam ipsam,
cujus ea est prescipua qucsdam veluti clavis, sine qua omnino incassum tentarentur cetera ; sea
y ejusmodi est, ut tironum, & sane etiam mediocrium, immo etiam longe infra mediocritatem
collocatorum, captum non excedat, potissimum si viva accedat Professoris vox mediocriter etiam
versati in Mechanica, cujus ope, pro certo habeo, rem ita patentem omnibus reddi posse, ut
ii etiam, qui Geometries penitus ignari sunt, paucorum admodum explicatione vocabulorum
accidente, earn ipsis oculis intueantur omnino perspicuam.

In tertia parte supponuntur utique nonnulla, ques demonstrantur in secunda ; sed ea ipsa
sunt admodum pauca, & Us, qui geometricas demonstrationes fastidiunt, facile admodum exponi
possunt res ipsez ita, ut penitus etiam sine ullo Geometries adjumento percipiantur, quanquam
sine Us ipsa demonstratio haberi non poterit ; ut idcirco in eo differre debeat is, qui secundam
partem attente legerit, y Geometriam calleat, ab eo, qui earn omittat, quod ille primus veritates
in tertia parte adbibitis, ac ex secunda erutas, ad explicationem Physices, intuebitur per evi-
dentiam ex ipsis demonstrationibus haustam, hie secundus easdem quodammodo per fidem Geo-
metris adhibitam credet. Hujusmodi inprimis est illud, particulam compositam ex punctis
etiam homogeneis, presditis lege virium proposita, posse per solam diversam ipsorum punctorum
dispositionem aliam particulam per certum intervallum vel perpetuo attrahere, vel perpetuo
repellere, vel nihil in earn agere, atque id ipsum viribus admodum diversis, y qua respectu diver-
sarum particularum diver see sint, & diver see respectu partium diver sarum ejusdem particules,
ac aliam particulam alicubi etiam urgeant in latus, unde plurium phesnomenorum explicatio in
Physica sponte ftuit.

Verum qui omnem Theories, y deductionum compagem aliquanto altius inspexerit, ac
diligentius perpenderit, videbit, ut spero, me in hoc perquisitionis genere multo ulterius
progressum esse, quam olim Newtonus ipse desideravit. Is enim in postremo Optices questione
prolatis Us, ques per vim attractivam, & vim repulsivam, mutata distantia ipsi attractives suc-
cedentem, explicari poterant, hesc addidit : " Atque h<sc quidem omnia si ita sint, jam Natura
universa valde erit simplex, y consimilis sui, perficiens nimirum magnos omnes corporum
ceslestium motus attractione gravitatis, qucs est mutua inter corpora ilia omnia, & minores fere
omnes particularum suarum motus alia aliqua vi attrahente, y repellente, ques est inter particulas
illas mutua." Aliquanto autem inferius de primigeniis particulis agens sic habet : " Porro
videntur mihi hce particules primigenics non modo in se vim inerties habere, motusque leges passivas
illas, ques ex vi ista necessario oriuntur ; verum etiam motum perpetuo accipere a certis principiis
actuosis, qualia nimirum sunt gravitas, y causa fermentationis, y cohesrentia corporum. Atque
hesc quidem principia considero non ut occultas qualitates, ques ex specificis rerum formis oriri
fingantur, sed ut universales Natures leges, quibus res ipscs sunt formates. Nam principia
quidem talia revera existere ostendunt phesnomena Natures, licet ipsorum causes ques sint,
nondum fuerit explicatum. Affirmare, singulas rerum species specificis presditas esse qualita-
tibus occultis, per quas eae vim certam in agenda habent, hoc utique est nihil dicere : at ex
phesnomenis Natures duo, vel tria derivare generalia motus principia, y deinde explicare,
quemadmodum proprietates, y actiones rerum corporearum omnium ex istis principiis conse-
quantur, id vero magnus esset factus in Philosophia progressus, etiamsi principiorum istorum
causes nondum essent cognites. Quare motus principia supradicta proponere non dubito, cum
per Naturam universam latissime pateant."

Hcsc ibi Newtonus, ubi is quidem magnos in Philosophia progressus facturum arbitratus
est eum, qui ad duo, vel tria generalia motus principia ex Natures phesnomenis derivata phesno-
menorum explicationem reduxerit, y sua principia protulit, ex quibus inter se diversis eorum
aliqua tantummodo explicari posse censuit. Quid igitur, ubi y ea ipsa tria, y alia prcscipua
quesque, ut ipsa etiam impenetrabilitas, y impulsio reducantur ad principium unicum legitima
ratiocinatione deductum ? At id per meam unicam, y simplicem virium legem presstari, patebit
sane consideranti operis totius Synopsim quandam, quam hie subjicio ; sed multo magis opus
ipsum diligentius pervolventi.

PREFACE TO READER THAT APPEARED IN THE VIENNA EDITION 15

between the forces & the distances is represented by it, is absolutely necessary for the under-
standing of the Theory itself, to which it is as it were the chief key, without which it would
be quite useless to try to pass on to the rest. But it is of such a nature that it does not go
beyond the capacity of beginners, not even of those of very moderate ability, or of classes
even far below the level of mediocrity ; especially if they have the additional assistance of
a teacher's voice, even though he is only moderately familiar with Mechanics. By his help,
I am sure, the subject can be made clear to every one, so that those of them that are quite
ignorant of geometry, given the explanation of but a few terms, may get a perfectly good
idea of the subject by ocular demonstration.

In the third part, some of the theorems that have been proved in the second part are
certainly assumed, but there are very few such ; &, for those who do not care for geo-
metrical proofs, the facts in question can be quite easily stated in such a manner that they
can be completely understood without any assistance from geometry, although no real
demonstration is possible without them. There is thus bound to be a difference between
the reader who has gone carefully through the second part, & who is well versed in geo-
metry, & him who omits the second part ; in that the former will regard the facts, that
have been proved in the second part, & are now employed in the third part for the ex-
planation of Physics, through the evidence derived from the demonstrations of these facts,
whilst the second will credit these same facts through the mere faith that he has in geome-
tricians. A specially good instance of this is the fact, that a particle composed of points
quite homogeneous, subject to a law of forces as stated, may, merely by altering the arrange-
ment of those points, either continually attract, or continually repel, or have no effect at
all upon, another particle situated at a known distance from it ; & this too, with forces that
differ widely, both in respect of different particles & in respect of different parts of the same
particle ; & may even urge another particle in a direction at right angles to the line join-
ing the two, a fact that readily gives a perfectly natural explanation of many physical
phenomena.

Anyone who shall have studied somewhat closely the whole system of my Theory, &
what I deduce from it, will see, I hope, that I have advanced in this kind of investigation
much further than Newton himself even thought open to his desires. For he, in the last
of his " Questions " in his Opticks, after stating the facts that could be explained by means
of an attractive force, & a repulsive force that takes the place of the attractive force when
the distance is altered, has added these words : — " Now if all these things are as stated, then
the whole of Nature must be exceedingly simple in design, & similar in all its parts, accom-
plishing all the mighty motions of the heavenly bodies, as it does, by the attraction of
gravity, which is a mutual force between any two bodies of the whole system ; and Nature
accomplishes nearly all the smaller motions of their particles by some other force of attrac-
tion or repulsion, which is mutual between any two of those particles." Farther on, when
he is speaking about elementary particles, he says : — " Moreover, it appears to me that these
elementary particles not only possess an essential property of inertia, & laws of motion,
though only passive, which are the necessary consequences of this property ; but they also
constantly acquire motion from the influence of certain active principles such as, for
instance, gravity, the cause of fermentation, & the cohesion of solids. I do not consider these
principles to be certain mysterious qualities feigned as arising from characteristic forms of
things, but as universal laws of Nature, by the influence of which these very things have
been created. For the phenomena of Nature show that these principles do indeed exist,
although their nature has not yet been elucidated. To assert that each & every species is
endowed with a mysterious property characteristic to it, due to which it has a definite mode
in action, is really equivalent to saying nothing at all. On the other hand, to derive from
the phenomena of Nature two or three general principles, & then to explain how the pro-
perties & actions of all corporate things follow from those principles, this would indeed be
a mighty advance in philosophy, even if the causes of those principles had not at the time
been discovered. For these reasons I do not hesitate in bringing forward the principles of
motion given above, since they are clearly to be perceived throughout the whole range of
Nature."

These are the words of Newton, & therein he states his opinion that he indeed will
have made great strides in philosophy who shall have reduced the explanation of phenomena
to two or three general principles derived from the phenomena of Nature ; & he
brought forward his own principles, themselves differing from one another, by which he
thought that some only of the phenomena could be explained. What then if not only the
three he mentions, but also other important principles, such as impenetrability & impul-
sive force, be reduced to a single principle, deduced by a process of rigorous argument ! It
will be quite clear that this is exactly what is done by my single simple law of forces, to
anyone who studies a kind of synopsis of the whole work, which I add below ; but it will be
iar more clear to him who studies the whole work with some earnestness,

SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

EX EDITIONE VIENNENSI

PARS I

sex numeris exhibeo, quando, & qua occasione Theoriam meam
invenerim, ac ubi hucusque de ea egerim in dissertationibus jam editis, quid
ea commune habeat cum Leibnitiana, quid cum Newtoniana Theoria, in
quo ab utraque discrepet, & vero etiam utrique praestet : addo, quid
alibi promiserim pertinens ad aequilibrium, & oscillationis centrum, &
quemadmodum iis nunc inventis, ac ex unico simplicissimo, ac elegant-
issimo theoremate profluentibus omnino sponte, cum dissertatiunculam

brevem meditarer, jam eo consilio rem aggressus ; repente mihi in opus integrum justse

molis evaserit tractatio.

7 Turn usque ad num. II expono Theoriam ipsam : materiam constantem punctis

prorsus simplicibus, indivisibilibus, & inextensis, ac a se invicem distantibus, quae puncta
habeant singula vim inertiae, & praeterea vim activam mutuam pendentem a distantiis, ut
nimirum, data distantia, detur & magnitude, & directio vis ipsius, mutata autem distantia,
mutetur vis ipsa, quae, imminuta distantia in infinitum, sit repulsiva, & quidem
excrescens in infinitum : aucta autem distantia, minuatur, evanescat, mutetur in attrac-
tivam crescentem primo, turn decrescentem, evanescentem, abeuntem iterum in repul-
sivam, idque per multas vices, donee demum in majoribus distantiis abeat in attractivam
decrescentem ad sensum in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum ; quern nexum virium
cum distantiis, & vero etiam earum transitum a positivis ad negativas, sive a repulsivis ad
attractivas, vel vice versa, oculis ipsis propono in vi, qua binae elastri cuspides conantur ad
es invicem accedere, vel a se invicem recedere, prout sunt plus justo distractae, vel con-
tractae.

II Inde ad num. 16 ostendo, quo pacto id non sit aggregatum quoddam virium temere

coalescentium, sed per unicam curvam continuam exponatur ope abscissarum exprimentium
distantias, & ordinatarum exprimentium vires, cujus curvae ductum, & naturam expono,
ac ostendo, in quo differat ab hyperbola ilia gradus tertii, quae Newtonianum gravitatem
exprimit : ac demum ibidem & argumentum, & divisionem propono operis totius.

1 6 Hisce expositis gradum facio ad exponendam totam illam analysim, qua ego ad ejusmodi

Theoriam deveni, & ex qua ipsam arbitror directa, & solidissima ratiocinatione deduci
totam. Contendo nimirum usque ad numerum 19 illud, in collisione corporum debere vel
haberi compenetrationem, vel violari legem continuitatis, velocitate mutata per saltum, si
cum inaequalibus velocitatibus deveniant ad immediatum contactum, quae continuitatis lex
cum (ut evinco) debeat omnino observari, illud infero, antequam ad contactum deveniant
corpora, debere mutari eorum velocitates per vim quandam, quae sit par extinguendse
velocitati, vel velocitatum differentiae, cuivis utcunque magnae.

19 A num. 19 ad 28 expendo effugium, quo ad eludendam argumenti mei vim utuntur ii,

qui negant corpora dura, qua quidem responsione uti non possunt Newtoniani, & Corpus-
culares generaliter, qui elementares corporum particulas assumunt prorsus duras : qui autem
omnes utcunque parvas corporum particulas molles admittunt, vel elasticas, difficultatem
non effugiunt, sed transferunt ad primas superficies, vel puncta, in quibus committeretur
omnino saltus, & lex continuitatis violaretur : ibidem quendam verborum lusum evolvo,
frustra adhibitum ad eludendam argumenti mei vim.

* Series numerorum, quibus tractari incipiunt, quae sunt in textu,

16

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK

(FROM THE VIENNA EDITION)

PART I

N the first six articles, I state the time at which I evolved my Theory, what i *
led me to it, & where I have discussed it hitherto in essays already pub-
lished : also what it has in common with the theories of Leibniz and
Newton ; in what it differs from either of these, & in what it is really
superior to them both. In addition I state what I have published else-
where about equilibrium & the centre of oscillation ; & how, having found
out that these matters followed quite easily from a single theorem of the
most simple & elegant kind, I proposed to write a short essay thereon ; but when I set to
work to deduce the matter from this principle, the discussion, quite unexpectedly to me,
developed into a whole work of considerable magnitude.

From this .until Art. II, I explain the Theory itself : that matter is unchangeable, 7
and consists of points that are perfectly simple, indivisible, of no extent, & separated from
one another ; that each of these points has a property of inertia, & in addition a mutual
active force depending on the distance in such a way that, if the distance is given, both the
magnitude & the direction of this force are given ; but if the distance is altered, so also is
the force altered ; & if the distance is diminished indefinitely, the force is repulsive, & in
fact also increases indefinitely ; whilst if the distance is increased, the force will be dimin-
ished, vanish, be changed to an attractive force that first of all increases, then decreases,
vanishes, is again turned into a repulsive force, & so on many times over ; until at greater
distances it finally becomes an attractive force that decreases approximately in the inverse
ratio of the squares of the distances. This connection between the forces & the distances,
& their passing from positive to negative, or from repulsive to attractive, & conversely, I
illustrate by the force with which the two ends of a spring strive to approach towards, or
recede from, one another, according as they are pulled apart, or drawn together, by more
than the natural amount.

From here on to Art. 1 6 I show that it is not merely an aggregate of forces combined n
haphazard, but that it is represented by a single continuous curve, by means of abscissse
representing the distances & ordinates representing the forces. I expound the construction
& nature of this curve ; & I show how it differs from the hyperbola of the third degree
which represents Newtonian gravitation. Finally, here too I set forth the scope of the
whole work & the nature of the parts into which it is divided.

These statements having been made, I start to expound the whole of the analysis, by 16
which I came upon a Theory of this kind, & from which I believe I have deduced the whole
of it by a straightforward & perfectly rigorous chain of reasoning. I contend indeed, from
here on until Art. 19, that, in the collision of solid bodies, either there must be compene-
tration, or the Law of Continuity must be violated by a sudden change of velocity, if
the bodies come into immediate contact with unequal velocities. Now since the Law of
Continuity must (as I prove that it must) be observed in every case, I infer that, before
the bodies reach the point of actual contact, their velocities must be altered by some force
which is capable of destroying the velocity, or the difference of the velocities, no matter how
great that may be.

From Art. 19 to Art. 28 I consider the artifice, adopted for the purpose of evading the 19
strength of my argument by those who deny the existence of hard bodies ; as a matter of
fact this cannot be used as an argument against me by the Newtonians, or the Corpuscular-
ians in general, for they assume that the elementary particles of solids are perfectly hard.
Moreover, those who admit that all the particles of solids, however small they may be, are
soft or elastic, yet do not escape the difficulty, but transfer it to prime surfaces, or points ;
& here a sudden change would be made & the Law of Continuity violated. In the same
connection I consider a certain verbal quibble, used in a vain attempt to foil the force of
my reasoning.

* These numbers are the numbers of the articles, in which the matters given in the text are first discussed.

17 C

1 8 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

28 Sequentibus num. 28 & 29 binas alias responsiones rejicio aliorum, quarum altera, ut

mei argument! vis elidatur, affirmat quispiam, prima materiae elementa compenetrari, alter
dicuntur materiae puncta adhuc moveri ad se invicem, ubi localiter omnino quiescunt, &
contra primum effugium evinco impenetrabilitatem ex inductione ; contra secundum
expono aequivocationem quandam in significatione vocis motus, cui aequivocationi totum
innititur.

30 Hinc num. 30, & 31 ostendo, in quo a Mac-Laurino dissentiam, qui considerata eadem,

quam ego contemplatus sum, collisione corporum, conclusit, continuitatis legem violari,
cum ego eandem illaesam esse debere ratus ad totam devenerim Theoriam meam.

32 Hie igitur, ut meae deductionis vim exponam, in ipsam continuitatis legem inquire, ac

a num. 32 ad 38 expono, quid ipsa sit, quid mutatio continua per gradus omnes intermedios,
quae nimirum excludat omnem saltum ab una magnitudine ad aliam sine transitu per

39 intermedias, ac Geometriam etiam ad explicationem rei in subsidium advoco : turn earn
probo primum ex inductione, ac in ipsum inductionis principium inquirens usque ad num.
44, exhibeo, unde habeatur ejusdem principii vis, ac ubi id adhiberi possit, rem ipsam
illustrans exemplo impenetrabilitatis erutae passim per inductionem, donee demum ejus vim

45 applicem ad legem continuitatis demonstrandam : ac sequentibus numeris casus evolvo
quosdam binarum classium, in quibus continuitatis lex videtur laedi nee tamen laeditur.

48 Post probationem principii continuitatis petitam ab inductione, aliam num. 48 ejus

probationem aggredior metaphysicam quandam, ex necessitate utriusque limitis in quanti-
tatibus realibus, vel seriebus quantitatum realium finitis, quae nimirum nee suo principio,
nee suo fine carere possunt. Ejus rationis vim ostendo in motu locali, & in Geometria

52 sequentibus duobus numeris : turn num. 52 expono difficultatem quandam, quas petitur
ex eo, quod in momento temporis, in quo transitur a non esse ad esse, videatur juxta ejusmodi
Theoriam debere simul haberi ipsum esse, & non esse, quorum alterum ad finem praecedentis
seriei statuum pertinet, alterum ad sequentis initium, ac solutionem ipsius fuse evolvo,
Geometria etiam ad rem oculo ipsi sistendam vocata in auxilium.

63 Num. 63, post epilogum eorum omnium, quae de lege continuitatis sunt dicta, id

principium applico ad excludendum saltum immediatum ab una velocitate ad aliam, sine
transitu per intermedias, quod & inductionem laederet pro continuitate amplissimam, &
induceret pro ipso momento temporis, in quo fieret saltus, binas velocitates, ultimam
nimirum seriei praecedentis, & primam novas, cum tamen duas simul velocitates idem mobile
habere omnino non possit. Id autem ut illustrem, & evincam, usque ad num. 72 considero
velocitatem ipsam, ubi potentialem quandam, ut appello, velocitatem ab actuali secerno,
& multa, quae ad ipsarum naturam, ac mutationes pertinent, diligenter evolvo, nonnullis
etiam, quae inde contra meae Theoriae probationem objici possunt, dissolutis.

His expositis conclude jam illud ex ipsa continuitate, ubi corpus quodpiam velocius
movetur post aliud lentius, ad contactum immediatum cum ilia velocitatum inaequalitate
deveniri non posse, in quo scilicet contactu primo mutaretur vel utriusque velocitas, vel
alterius, per saltum, sed debere mutationem velocitatis incipere ante contactum ipsum.

73 Hinc num. 73 infero, debere haberi mutationis causam, quae appelletur vis : turn num. 74

74 hanc vim debere esse mutuam, & agere in partes contrarias, quod per inductionem evinco,

75 & inde infero num. 75, appellari posse repulsivam ejusmodi vim mutuam, ac ejus legem
exquirendam propono. In ejusmodi autem perquisitione usque ad num. 80 invenio illud,
debere vim ipsam imminutis distantiis crescere in infinitum ita ut par sit extinguendae
velocitati utcunque magnse ; turn & illud, imminutis in infinitum etiam distantiis, debere
in infinitum augeri, in maximis autem debere esse e contrario attractivam, uti est gravitas :
inde vero colligo limitem inter attractionem, & repulsionem : turn sensim plures, ac etiam
plurimos ejusmodi limites invenio, sive transitus ab attractione ad repulsionem, & vice
versa, ac formam totius curvae per ordinatas suas exprimentis virium legem determino.

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 19

In the next articles, 28 & 29, I refute a further pair of arguments advanced by others ; 28
in the first of these, in order to evade my reasoning, someone states that there is compene-
tration of the primary elements of matter ; in the second, the points of matter are said to
be moved with regard to one another, even when they are absolutely at rest as regards
position. In reply to the first artifice, I prove the principle of impenetrability by induc-
tion ; & in reply to the second, I expose an equivocation in the meaning of the term motion,
an equivocation upon which the whole thing depends.

Then, in Art. 30, 31, I show in what respect I differ from Maclaurin, who, having 30
considered the same point as myself, came to the conclusion that in the collision of bodies
the Law of Continuity was violated ; whereas I obtained the whole of my Theory from the
assumption that this law must be unassailable.

At this point therefore, in order that the strength of my deductive reasoning might 32
be shown, I investigate the Law of Continuity ; and from Art. 32 to Art. 38, I set forth its
nature, & what is meant by a continuous change through all intermediate stages, such as
to exclude any sudden change from any one magnitude to another except by a passage
through intermediate stages ; & I call in geometry as well to help my explanation of the
matter. Then I investigate its truth first of all by induction ; &, investigating the prin- 39
ciple of induction itself, as far as Art. 44, 1 show whence the force of this principle is derived,
& where it can be used. I give by way of illustration an example in which impenetrability
is derived entirely by induction ; & lastly I apply the force of the principle to demonstrate
the Law of Continuity. In the articles that follow I consider certain cases of two kinds, 45
in which the Law of Continuity appears to be violated, but is not however really violated.

After this proof of the principle of continuity procured through induction, in Art. 48, 48
I undertake another proof of a metaphysical kind, depending upon the necessity of a limit
on either side for either real quantities or for a finite series of real quantities ; & indeed it
is impossible that these limits should be lacking, either at the beginning or the end. I
demonstrate the force of this reasoning in the case of local motion, & also in geometry, in the
next two articles. Then in Art. 52 I explain a certain difficulty, which is derived from the S2
fact that, at the instant at which there is a passage from non-existence to existence, it appears
according to a theory of this kind that we must have at the same time both existence and
non-existence. For one of these belongs to the end of the antecedent series of states, & the
other to the beginning of the consequent series. I consider fairly fully' the solution of this
problem ; and I call in geometry as well to assist in giving a visual representation of the
matter.

In Art. 63, after summing up all that has been said about the Law of Continuity, I 63
apply the principle to exclude the possibility of any sudden change from one velocity to
another, except by passing through intermediate velocities ; this would be contrary to the
very full proof that I give for continuity, as it would lead to our having two velocities at
the instant at which the change occurred. That is to say, there would be the final velocity
of the antecedent series, & the initial velocity of the consequent series ; in spite of the fact
that it is quite impossible for a moving body to have two different velocities at the same
time. Moreover, in order to illustrate & prove the point, from here on to Art. 72, I
consider velocity itself ; and I distinguish between a potential velocity, as I call it, & an
actual velocity ; I also investigate carefully many matters that relate to the nature of these
velocities & to their changes. Further, I settle several difficulties that can be brought
up in opposition to the proof of my Theory, in consequence.

This done, I then conclude from the principle of continuity that, when one body with
a greater velocity follows after another body having a less velocity, it is impossible that
there should ever be absolute contact with such an inequality of velocities ; that is to say,
a case of the velocity of each, or of one or the other, of them being changed suddenly at
the instant of contact. I assert on the other hand that the change in the velocities must
begin before contact. Hence, in Art. 73, I infer that there must be a cause for this change : 73
which is to be called " force." Then, in Art. 74, I prove that this force is a mutual one, & 74
that it acts in opposite directions ; the proof is by induction. From this, in Art. 75, I 75
infer that such a mutual force may be said to be repulsive ; & I undertake the investigation
of the law that governs it. Carrying on this investigation as far as Art. 80, I find that this
force must increase indefinitely as the distance is diminished, in order that it may be capable
of destroying any velocity, however great that velocity may be. Moreover, I find that,
whilst the force must be indefinitely increased as the distance is indefinitely decreased, it
must be on the contrary attractive at very great distances, as is the case for gravitation.
Hence I infer that there must be a limit-point forming a boundary between attraction &
repulsion ; & then by degrees I find more, indeed very many more, of such limit-points,
or points of transition from attraction to repulsion, & from repulsion to attraction ; & I
determine the form of the entire curve, that expresses by its ordinates the law of these forces.

20 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

8 1 Eo usque virium legem deduce, ac definio ; turn num. 81 eruo ex ipsa lege consti-

tutionem elementorum materiae, quae debent esse simplicia, ob repulsionem in minimis
distantiis in immensum auctam ; nam ea, si forte ipsa elementa partibus constarent, nexum
omnem dissolveret. Usque ad num. 88 inquire in illud, an hasc elementa, ut simplicia esse
debent, ita etiam inextensa esse debeant, ac exposita ilia, quam virtualem extensionem
appellant, eandem exclude inductionis principio, & difficultatem evolvo turn earn, quae peti
possit ab exemplo ejus generis extensionis, quam in anima indivisibili, & simplice per aliquam
corporis partem divisibilem, & extensam passim admittunt : vel omnipraesentiae Dei : turn
earn, quae peti possit ab analogia cum quiete, in qua nimirum conjungi debeat unicum
spatii punctum cum serie continua momentorum temporis, uti in extensione virtuali unicum
momentum temporis cum serie continua punctorum spatii conjungeretur, ubi ostendo, nee
quietem omnimodam in Natura haberi usquam, nee adesse semper omnimodam inter

88 tempus, & spatium analogiam. Hie autem ingentem colligo ejusmodi determinationis
fructum, ostendens usque ad num. 91, quantum prosit simplicitas, indivisibilitas, inextensio
elementorum materiae, ob summotum transitum a vacuo continue per saltum ad materiam
continuam, ac ob sublatum limitem densitatis, quae in ejusmodi Theoria ut minui in
infinitum potest, ita potest in infinitum etiam augeri, dum in communi, ubi ad contactum
deventum est, augeri ultra densitas nequaquam potest, potissimum vero ob sublatum omne
continuum coexistens, quo sublato & gravissimae difficultates plurimse evanescunt, &
infinitum actu existens habetur nullum, sed in possibilibus tantummodo remanet series
finitorum in infinitum producta.

91 His definitis, inquire usque ad num. 99 in illud, an ejusmodi elementa sint censenda

homogenea, an heterogenea : ac primo quidem argumentum pro homogeneitate saltern in
eo, quod pertinet ad totam virium legem, invenio in homogenietate tanta primi cruris
repulsivi in minimis distantiis, ex quo pendet impenetrabilitas, & postremi attractivi, quo
gravitas exhibetur, in quibus omnis materia est penitus homogenea. Ostendo autem, nihil
contra ejusmodi homogenietatem evinci ex principio Leibnitiano indiscernibilium, nihil ex
inductione, & ostendo, unde tantum proveniat discrimen in compositis massulis, ut in
frondibus, & foliis ; ac per inductionem, & analogiam demonstro, naturam nos ad homo-
geneitatem elementorum, non ad heterogeneitatem deducere.

100 Ea ad probationem Theoriae pertinent ; qua absoluta, antequam inde fructus colli-
gantur multiplices, gradum hie facio ad evolvendas difficultates, quae vel objectae jam sunt,
vel objici posse videntur mihi, primo quidem contra vires in genere, turn contra meam
hanc expositam, comprobatamque virium legem, ac demum contra puncta ilia indivisibilia,
& inextensa, quae ex ipsa ejusmodi virium lege deducuntur.

101 Primo quidem, ut iis etiam faciam satis, qui inani vocabulorum quorundam sono
perturbantur, a num. 101 ad 104 ostendo, vires hasce non esse quoddam occultarum
qualitatum genus, sed patentem sane Mechanismum, cum & idea earum sit admodum
distincta, & existentia, ac lex positive comprobata ; ad Mechanicam vero pertineat omnis

104 tractatio de Motibus, qui a datis viribus etiam sine immediate impulsu oriuntur. A num.
104 ad 106 ostendo, nullum committi saltum in transitu a repulsionibus ad attractiones,

1 06 & vice versa, cum nimirum per omnes inter medias quantitates is transitus fiat. Inde vero
ad objectiones gradum facio, quae totam curvas formam impetunt. Ostendo nimirum usque
ad num. 116, non posse omnes repulsiones a minore attractione desumi ; repulsiones ejusdem
esse seriei cum attractionibus, a quibus differant tantummodo ut minus a majore, sive ut
negativum a positivo ; ex ipsa curvarum natura, quae, quo altioris sunt gradus, eo in
pluribus punctis rectam secare possunt, & eo in immensum plures sunt numero ; haberi
potius, ubi curva quaeritur, quae vires exprimat, indicium pro curva ejus naturae, ut rectam
in plurimis punctis secet, adeoque plurimos secum afferat virium transitus a repulsivis ad
attractivas, quam pro curva, quae nusquam axem secans attractiones solas, vel solas pro
distantiis omnibus repulsiones exhibeat : sed vires repulsivas, & multiplicitatem transituum
esse positive probatam, & deductam totam curvas formam, quam itidem ostendo, non esse
ex arcubus natura diversis temere coalescentem, sed omnino simplicem, atque earn ipsam

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 21

So far I have been occupied in deducing and settling the law of these forces. Next,
in Art. 8r, I derive from this law the constitution of the elements of matter. These must be 81
quite simple, on account of the repulsion at very small distances being immensely great ;
for if by chance those elements were made up of parts, the repulsion would destroy all
connections between them. Then, as far as Art. 88, I consider the point, as to whether
these elements, as they must be simple, must therefore be also of no extent ; &, having ex-
plained what is called " virtual extension," I reject it by the principle of induction. I
then consider the difficulty which may be brought forward from an example of this kind of
extension ; such as is generally admitted in the case of the indivisible and one-fold soul
pervading a divisible & extended portion of the body, or in the case of the omnipresence
of GOD. Next I consider the difficulty that may be brought forward from an analogy with
rest ; for here in truth one point of space must be connected with a continuous series of
instants of time, just as in virtual extension a single instant of time would be connected with
a continuous series of points of space. I show that there can neither be perfect rest any- gg
where in Nature, nor can there be at all times a perfect analogy between time and space.
In this connection, I also gather a large harvest from such a conclusion as this ; showing,
as far as Art. 91, the great advantage of simplicity, indivisibility, & non-extension in the
elements of matter. For they do away with the idea of a passage from a continuous vacuum
to continuous matter through a sudden change. Also they render unnecessary any limit
to density : this, in a Theory like mine, can be just as well increased to an indefinite extent,
as it can be indefinitely decreased : whilst in the ordinary theory, as soon as contact takes
place, the density cannot in any way be further increased. But, most especially, they do
away with the idea of everything continuous coexisting ; & when this is done away with,
the majority of the greatest difficulties vanish. Further, nothing infinite is found actually
existing ; the only thing possible that remains is a series of finite things produced inde-
finitely.

These things being settled, I investigate, as far as Art. 99, the point as to whether QJ
elements of this kind are to be considered as being homogeneous or heterogeneous. I find
my first evidence in favour of homogeneity — at least as far as the complete law of forces
is concerned — in the equally great homogeneity of the first repulsive branch of my curve
of forces for very small distances, upon which depends impenetrability, & of the last attrac-
tive branch, by which gravity is represented. Moreover I show that there is nothing that
can be proved in opposition to homogeneity such as this, that can be derived from either
the Leibnizian principle of " indiscernibles," or by induction. I also show whence arise
those differences, that are so great amongst small composite bodies, such as we see in boughs
& leaves ; & I prove, by induction & analogy, that the very nature of things leads us to
homogeneity, & not to heterogeneity, for the elements of matter.

These matters are all connected with the proof of my Theory. Having accomplished IOo
this, before I start to gather the manifold fruits to be derived from it, I proceed to consider
the objections to my theory, such as either have been already raised or seem to me capable
of being raised ; first against forces in general, secondly against the law of forces that I
have enunciated & proved, & finally against those indivisible, non-extended points that
are deduced from a law of forces of this kind.

First of all then, in order that I may satisfy even those who are confused over the 101
empty sound of certain terms, I show, in Art. 101 to 104, that these forces are not some
sort of mysterious qualities ; but that they form a readily intelligible mechanism, since
both the idea of them is perfectly distinct, as well as their existence, & in addition the law
that governs them is demonstrated in a direct manner. To Mechanics belongs every dis-
cussion concerning motions that arise from given forces without any direct impulse. In
Art. 104 to 106, I show that no sudden change takes place in passing from repulsions to 104
attractions or vice versa ; for this transition is made through every intermediate quantity.
Then I pass on to consider the objections that are made against the whole form of my 106
curve. I show indeed, from here on to Art. 116, that all repulsions cannot be taken to
come from a decreased attraction ; that repulsions belong to the self-same series as attrac-
tions, differing from them only as less does from more, or negative from positive. From
the very nature of the curves (for which, the higher the degree, the more points there are
in which they can intersect a right line, & vastly more such curves there are), I deduce
that there is more reason for assuming a curve of the nature of mine (so that it may cut a
right line in a large number of points, & thus give a large number of transitions of the forces
from repulsions to attractions), than for assuming a curve that, since it does not cut
the axis anywhere, will represent attractions alone, or repulsions alone, at all distances.
Further, I point out that repulsive forces, and a multiplicity of transitions are directly
demonstrated, & the whole form of the curve is a matter of deduction ; & I also show that
it is not formed of a number of arcs differing in nature connected together haphazard ;

22 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

simplicitatem in Supplementis cvidentissime demonstro, exhibens methodum, qua deveniri
possit ad aequationem ejusmodi curvse simplicem, & uniformem ; licet, ut hie ostendo, ipsa
ilia lex virium possit mente resolvi in plures, quae per plures curvas exponantur, a quibus
tamen omnibus ilia reapse unica lex, per unicam illam continuant, & in se simplicem curvam
componatur.

121 A num. 121 refello, quae objici possunt a lege gravitatis decrescentis in ratione reciproca

duplicata distantiarum, quae nimirum in minimis distantiis attractionem requirit crescentem
in infinitum. Ostendo autem, ipsam non esse uspiam accurate in ejusmodi ratione, nisi
imaginarias resolutiones exhibeamus ; nee vero ex Astronomia deduci ejusmodi legem
prorsus accurate servatam in ipsis Planetarum, & Cometarum distantiis, sed ad summum ita

124 proxime, ut differentia ab ea lege sit perquam exigua : ac a num. 124 expendo argumentum,
quod pro ejusmodi lege desumi possit ex eo, quod cuipiam visa sit omnium optima, &
idcirco electa ab Auctore Naturae, ubi ipsum Optimismi principium ad trutinam revoco, ac
exclude, & vero illud etiam evinco, non esse, cur omnium optima ejusmodi lex censeatur :
in Supplementis vero ostendo, ad qua; potius absurda deducet ejusmodi lex, & vero etiam
aliae plures attractionis, quae imminutis in infinitum distantiis excrescat in infinitum.

131 Num. 131 a viribus transeo ad elementa, & primum ostendo, cur punctorum inexten-

sorum ideam non habeamus, quod nimirum earn haurire non possumus per sensus, quos
solae massae, & quidem grandiores, afficiunt, atque idcirco eandem nos ipsi debemus per
reflexionem efformare, quod quidem facile possumus. Ceterum illud ostendo, me non
inducere primum in Physicam puncta indivisibilia, & inextensa, cum eo etiam Leibnitianae
monades recidant, sed sublata extensione continua difficultatem auferre illam omnem, quae
jam olim contra Zenonicos objecta, nunquam est satis soluta, qua fit, ut extensio continua
ab inextensis effici omnino non possit.

140 Num. 140 ostendo, inductionis principium contra ipsa nullam habere vim, ipsorum

autem existentiam vel inde probari, quod continuitas se se ipsam destruat, & ex ea assumpta
probetur argumentis a me institutis hoc ipsum, prima elementa esse indivisibilia, & inextensa,

143 nee ullum haberi extensum continuum. A num. 143 ostendo, ubi continuitatem admittam,
nimirum in solis motibus ; ac illud explico, quid mihi sit spatium, quid tempus, quorum
naturam in Supplementis multo uberius expono. Porro continuitatem ipsam ostendo a
natura in solis motibus obtineri accurate, in reliquis affectari quodammodo ; ubi & exempla
quaedam evolvo continuitatis primo aspectu violatae, in quibusdam proprietatibus luminis,
ac in aliis quibusdam casibus, in quibus quaedam crescunt per additionem partium, non (ut
ajunt) per intussumptionem.

\

153 A num. 153 ostendo, quantum haec mea puncta a spiritibus differant ; ac illud etiam

evolvo, unde fiat, ut in ipsa idea corporis videatur includi extensio continua, ubi in ipsam
idearum nostrarum originem inquire, & quae inde praejudicia profluant, expono. Postremo

165 autem loco num. 165 innuo, qui fieri possit, ut puncta inextensa, & a se invicem distantia,
in massam coalescant, quantum libet, cohaerentem, & iis proprietatibus praeditam, quas in
corporibus experimur, quod tamen ad tertiam partem pertinet, ibi multo uberius pertrac-
tandum ; ac ibi quidem primam hanc partem absolve.

PARS II

166 Num. 166 hujus partis argumentum propono ; sequenti vero 167, quae potissimum in

curva virium consideranda sint, enuncio. Eorum considerationem aggressus, primo quidem

1 68 usque ad num. 172 in ipsos arcus inquire, quorum alii attractivi, alii repulsivi, alii asym-
ptotici, ubi casuum occurrit mira multitudo, & in quibusdam consectaria notatu digna, ut
& illud, cum ejus formae curva plurium asymptotorum esse possit, Mundorum prorsus
similium seriem posse oriri, quorum alter respectu alterius vices agat unius, & indissolubilis

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 23

but that it is absolutely one-fold. This one-fold character I demonstrate in the Supple-
ments in a very evident manner, giving a method by which a simple and uniform equation
may be obtained for a curve of this kind. Although, as I there point out, this law of forces
may be mentally resolved into several, and these may be represented by several correspond-
ing curves, yet that law, actually unique, may be compounded from all of these together
by means of the unique, continuous & one-fold curve that I give.

In Art. 121, I start to give a refutation of those objections that may be raised from I2i
a consideration of the fact that the law of gravitation, decreasing in the inverse duplicate
ratio of the distances, demands that there should be an attraction at very small distances,
& that it should increase indefinitely. However, I show that the law is nowhere exactly in
conformity with a ratio of this sort, unless we add explanations that are merely imaginative ;
nor, I assert, can a law of this kind be deduced from astronomy, that is followed with per-
fect accuracy even at the distances of the planets & the comets, but one merely that is at
most so very nearly correct, that the difference from the law of inverse squares is very
slight. From Art. 124 onwards,! examine the value of the argument that can be drawn 124
in favour of a law of this sort from the view that, as some have thought, it is the best of
all, & that on that account it was selected by the Founder of Nature. In connection with
this I examine the principle of Optimism, & I reject it ; moreover I prove conclusively
that there is no reason why this sort of law should be supposed to be the best of all. Fur-
ther in the Supplements, I show to what absurdities a law of this sort is more likely to lead ;
& the same thing for other laws of an attraction that increases indefinitely as the distance
is diminished indefinitely.

In Art. 131 I pass from forces to elements. I first of all show the reason why we may 1*1
not appreciate the idea of non-extended points ; it is because we are unable to perceive
them by means of the senses, which are only affected by masses, & these too must be of
considerable size. Consequently we have to build up the idea by a process of reasoning ;
& this we can do without any difficulty. In addition, I point out that I am not the first
to introduce indivisible & non-extended points into physical science ; for the " monads "
of Leibniz practically come to the same thing. But I show that, by rejecting the idea of
continuous extension, I remove the whole of the difficulty, which was raised against the
disciples of Zeno in years gone by, & has never been answered satisfactorily ; namely, the
difficulty arising from the fact that by no possible means can continuous extension be
made up from things of no extent.

In Art. 140 I show that the principle of induction yields no argument against these 140
indivisibles ; rather their existence is demonstrated by that principle, for continuity is
self-contradictory. On this assumption it may be proved, by arguments originated by
myself, that the primary elements are indivisible & non-extended, & that there does not
exist anything possessing the property of continuous extension. From Art. 143 onwards, j .,
I point out the only connection in which I shall admit continuity, & that is in motion.
I state the idea that I have with regard to space, & also time : the nature of these I explain
much more fully in the Supplements. Further, I show that continuity itself is really a
property of motions only, & that in all other things it is more or less a false assumption.
Here I also consider some examples in which continuity at first sight appears to be
violated, such as in some of the properties of light, & in certain other cases where things
increase by addition of parts, and not by intussumption, as it is termed.

From Art. 153 onwards, I show how greatly these points of mine differ from object- 153
souls. I consider how it comes about that continuous extension seems to be included
in the very idea of a body ; & in this connection, I investigate the origin of our ideas
& I explain the prejudgments that arise therefrom. Finally, in Art. 165, I lightly 165
sketch what might happen to enable points that are of no extent, & at a distance from
one another, to coalesce into a coherent mass of any size, endowed with those properties
that we experience in bodies. This, however, belongs to the third part ; & there it will be
much more fully developed. This finishes the first part.

PART II

In Art. 1 66 I state the theme of this second part ; and in Art. 167 I declare what 166
matters are to be considered more especially in connection with the curve of forces. Com-
ing to the consideration of these matters, I first of all, as far as Art. 172, investigate the 168
arcs of the curve, some of which are attractive, some repulsive and some asymptotic. Here
a marvellous number of different cases present themselves, & to some of them there are
noteworthy corollaries ; such as that, since a curve of this kind is capable of possessing a
considerable number of asymptotes, there can arise a series of perfectly similar cosmi, each
of which will act upon all the others as a single inviolate elementary system. From Art. 172

24 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

172 element!. Ad. num. 179 areas contemplor arcubus clausas, quae respondentes segmento axis
cuicunque, esse possunt magnitudine utcunque magnae, vel parvae, sunt autem mensura

179 incrementi, vel decrement! quadrat! velocitatum. Ad num. 189 inquire in appulsus curvse
ad axem, sive is ibi secetur ab eadem (quo casu habentur transitus vel a repulsione ad
attractionem, vel ab attractione ad repulsionem, quos dico limites, & quorum maximus est
in tota mea Theoria usus), sive tangatur, & curva retro redeat, ubi etiam pro appulsibus
considero recessus in infinitum per arcus asymptoticos, & qui transitus, sive limites, oriantur
inde, vel in Natura admitti possint, evolvo.

189 Num. 189 a consideratione curvae ad punctorum combinationem gradum facio, ac

primo quidem usque ad num. 204 ago de systemate duorum punctorum, ea pertractans,
quas pertinent ad eorum vires mutuas, & motus, sive sibi relinquantur, sive projiciantur
utcunque, ubi & conjunctione ipsorum exposita in distantiis limitum, & oscillationibus
variis, sive nullam externam punctorum aliorum actionem sentiant, sive perturbentur ab
eadem, illud innuo in antecessum, quanto id usui futurum sit in parte tertia ad exponenda
cohaesionis varia genera, fermentationes, conflagrationes, emissiones vaporum, proprietates
luminis, elasticitatem, mollitiem.

204 Succedit a Num. 204 ad 239 multo uberior consideratio trium punctorum, quorum

vires generaliter facile definiuntur data ipsorum positione quacunque : verum utcunque
data positione, & celeritate nondum a Geometris inventi sunt motus ita, ut generaliter pro
casibus omnibus absolvi calculus possit. Vires igitur, & variationem ingentem, quam
diversae pariunt combinationes punctorum, utut tantummodo numero trium, persequor

209 usque ad num. 209. Hinc usque ad num. 214 quaedam evolvo, quae pertinent ad vires
ortas in singulis ex actione composita reliquorum duorum, & quae tertium punctum non ad
accessum urgeant, vel recessum tantummodo respectu eorundem, sed & in latus, ubi &
soliditatis imago prodit, & ingens sane discrimen in distantiis particularum perquam exiguis
ac summa in maximis, in quibus gravitas agit, conformitas, quod quanto itidem ad Naturae

214 explicationem futurum sit usui, significo. Usque ad num. 221 ipsis etiam oculis contem-
plandum propono ingens discrimen in legibus virium, quibus bina puncta agunt in tertium,
sive id jaceat in recta, qua junguntur, sive in recta ipsi perpendiculari, & eorum intervallum
secante bifariam, constructis ex data primigenia curva curvis vires compositas exhibentibus :

221 turn sequentibus binis numeris casum evolvo notatu dignissimum, in quo mutata sola
positione binorum punctorum, punctum tertium per idem quoddam intervallum, situm in
eadem distantia a medio eorum intervallo, vel perpetuo attrahitur, vel perpetuo repellitur,
vel nee attrahitur, nee repellitur ; cujusmodi discrimen cum in massis haberi debeat multo

222 majus, illud indico, num. 222, quantus inde itidem in Physicam usus proveniat.

223 Hie jam num. 223 a viribus binorum punctorum transeo ad considerandum totum

ipsorum systema, & usque ad num. 228 contemplor tria puncta in directum sita, ex quorum
mutuis viribus relationes quaedam exurgunt, quas multo generaliores redduntur inferius, ubi
in tribus etiam punctis tantummodo adumbrantur, quae pertinent ad virgas rigidas, flexiles,
elasticas, ac ad vectem, & ad alia plura, quae itidem inferius, ubi de massis, multo generaliora

228 fiunt. Demum usque ad num. 238 contemplor tria puncta posita non in directum, sive in
aequilibrio sint, sive in perimetro ellipsium quarundam, vel curvarum aliarum ; in quibus
mira occurrit analogia limitum quorundam cum limitibus, quos habent bina puncta in axe
curvae primigeniae ad se invicem, atque ibidem multo major varietas casuum indicatur pro
massis, & specimen applicationis exhibetur ad soliditatem, & liquationem per celerem

238 intestinum motum punctis impressum. Sequentibus autem binis numeris generalia quaedam
expono de systemate punctorum quatuor cum applicatione ad virgas solidas, rigidas, flexiles,
ac ordines particularum varies exhibeo per pyramides, quarum infimae ex punctis quatuor,
superiores ex quatuor pyramidibus singulae coalescant.

24° A num. 240 ad massas gradu facto usque a num. 264 considero, quae ad centrum gravi-

tatis pertinent, ac demonstro generaliter, in quavis massa esse aliquod, & esse unicum :
ostendo, quo pacto determinari generaliter possit, & quid in methodo, quae communiter
adhibetur, desit ad habendam demonstrationis vim, luculenter expono, & suppleo, ac

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 25

to Art. 179, I consider the areas included by the arcs; these, corresponding to different 172
segments of the axis, may be of any magnitude whatever, either great or small ; moreover
they measure the increment or decrement in the squares of the velocities. Then, on as 179
far as Art. 189, 1 investigate the approach of the curve to the axis ; both when the former
is cut by the latter, in which case there are transitions from repulsion to attraction and
from attraction to repulsion, which I call ' limits,' & use very largely in every part of my
Theory ; & also when the former is touched by the latter, & the curve once again recedes
from the axis. I consider, too, as a case of approach, recession to infinity along an asymp-
totic arc ; and I investigate what transitions, or limits, may arise from such a case, &
whether such are admissible in Nature.

In Art. 189, I pass on from the consideration of the curve to combinations of points. l%9
First, as far as Art. 204, I deal with a system of two points. I work out those things that
concern their mutual forces, and motions, whether they are left to themselves or pro-
jected in any manner whatever. Here also, having explained the connection between
these motions & the distances of the limits, & different cases of oscillations, whether they
are affected by external action of other points, or are not so disturbed, I make an antici-
patory note of the great use to which this will be put in the third part, for the purpose
of explaining various kinds of cohesion, fermentations, conflagrations, emissions of vapours,
the properties of light, elasticity and flexibility.

There follows, from Art. 204 to Art. 239, the much more fruitful consideration of a 204
system of three points. The forces connected with them can in general be easily deter-
mined for any given positions of the points ; but, when any position & velocity are given,
the motions have not yet been obtained by geometricians in such a form that the general
calculation can be performed for every possible case. So I proceed to consider the forces,
& the huge variation that different combinations of the points beget, although they are
only three in number, as far as Art. 209. From that, on to Art. 214, I consider certain 209
things that have to do with the forces that arise from the action, on each of the points, of
the other two together, & how these urge the third point not only to approach, or recede
from, themselves, but also in a direction at right angles ; in this connection there comes
forth an analogy with solidity, & a truly immense difference between the several cases when
the distances are very small, & the greatest conformity possible at very great distances
such as those at which gravity acts ; & I point out what great use will be made of this also
in explaining the constitution of Nature. Then up to Art. 221, I give ocular demonstra- 214
tions of the huge differences that there are in the laws of forces with which two points act
upon a third, whether it lies in the right line joining them, or in the right line that is the
perpendicular which bisects the interval between them ; this I do by constructing, from
the primary curve, curves representing the composite forces. Then in the two articles 221
that follow, I consider the case, a really important one, in which, by merely changing the
position of the two points, the third point, at any and the same definite interval situated
at the same distance from the middle point of the interval between the two points, will
be either continually attracted, or continually repelled, or neither attracted nor repelled ;
& since a difference of this kind should hold to a much greater degree in masses, I point
out, in Art. 222, the great use that will be made of this also in Physics. 222

At this point then, in Art. 223, I pass from the forces derived from two points to the 223
consideration of a whole system of them ; and, as far as Art. 228, I study three points
situated in a right line, from the mutual forces of which there arise certain relations, which
I return to later in much greater generality ; in this connection also are outlined, for three
points only, matters that have to do with rods, either rigid, flexible or elastic, and with
the lever, as well as many other things ; these, too, are treated much more generally later
on, when I consider masses. Then right on to Art. 238, I consider three points that do
not lie in a right line, whether they are in equilibrium, or moving in the perimeters of
certain ellipses or other curves. Here we come across a marvellous analogy between certain
limits and the limits which two points lying on the axis of the primary curve have with
respect to each other ; & here also a much greater variety of cases for masses is shown,
& an example is given of the application to solidity, & liquefaction, on account of a quick
internal motion being impressed on the points of the body. Moreover, in the two articles
that then follow, I state some general propositions with regard to a system of four points,
together with their application to solid rods, both rigid and flexible ; I also give an illus-
tration of various classes of particles by means of pyramids, each of which is formed of four
points in the most simple case, & of four of such pyramids in the more complicated cases.

From Art. 240 as far as Art. 264, I pass on to masses & consider matters pertaining to 24°
the centre of gravity ; & I prove that in general there is one, & only one, in any given mass.
I show how it can in general be determined, & I set forth in clear terms the point that is
lacking in the usual method, when it comes to a question of rigorous proof ; this deficiency

26 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

exemplum profero quoddam ejusdem generis, quod ad numerorum pertinet multiplica-
tionem, & ad virium compositionem per parallelogramma, quam alia methodo generaliore
exhibeo analoga illi ipsi, qua generaliter in centrum gravitatis inquire : turn vero ejusdem
ope demonstro admodum expedite, & accuratissime celebre illud Newtoni theorema de
statu centri gravitatis per mutuas internas vires numquam turbato.

264 Ejus tractionis fructus colligo plures : conservationem ejusdem quantitatis motuum in

265 Mundo in eandem plagam num. 264, sequalitatem actionis, & reactionis in massis num. 265,

266 collisionem corporum, & communicationem motus in congressibus directis cum eorum
276 legibus, inde num. 276 congressus obliques, quorum Theoriam a resolutione motuum reduce

277, 278 ad compositionem num. 277, quod sequent! numero 278 transfero ad incursum etiam in
270 planum immobile ; ac a num. 279 ad 289 ostendo nullam haberi in Natura veram virium,
aut motuum resolutionem, sed imaginariam tantummodo, ubi omnia evolvo, & explico
casuum genera, quae prima fronte virium resolutionem requirere videntur.

289 A num. 289 ad 297 leges expono compositionis virium, & resolutionis, ubi & illud

notissimum, quo pacto in compositione decrescat vis, in resolutione crescat, sed in ilia priore
conspirantium summa semper maneat, contrariis elisis ; in hac posteriore concipiantur
tantummodo binae vires contrarise adjectas, quse consideratio nihil turbet phenomena ;
unde fiat, ut nihil inde pro virium vivarum Theoria deduci possit, cum sine iis explicentur
omnia, ubi plura itidem explico ex iis phsenomenis, quse pro ipsis viribus vivis afferri solent.

2Q7 A num. 297 occasione inde arrepta aggredior qusedam, quae ad legem continuitatis

pertinent, ubique in motibus sancte servatam, ac ostendo illud, idcirco in collisionibus
corporum, ac in motu reflexo, leges vulgo definitas, non nisi proxime tantummodo observari,
& usque ad num. 307 relationes varias persequor angulorum incidentisa, & reflexionis, sive
vires constanter in accessu attrahant, vel repellant constanter, sive jam attrahant, jam
repellant : ubi & illud considero, quid accidat, si scabrities superficiei agentis exigua sit,
quid, si ingens, ac elementa profero, quae ad luminis reflexionem, & refractionem explican-
dam, definiendamque ex Mechanica requiritur, relationem itidem vis absolutae ad relativam
in obliquo gravium descensu, & nonnulla, quae ad oscillationum accuratiorem Theoriam
necessaria sunt, prorsus elementaria, diligenter expono.

307 A num. 307 inquire in trium massarum systema, ubi usque ad num. 313 theoremata

evolvo plura, quae pertinent ad directionem virium in singulis compositarum e binis
reliquarum actionibus, ut illud, eas directiones vel esse inter se parallelas, vel, si utrinque

313 indefinite producantur, per quoddam commune punctum transire omnes : turn usque ad
321 theoremata alia plura, quae pertinent ad earumdem compositarum virium rationem ad
se invicem, ut illud & simplex, & elegans, binarum massarum vires acceleratrices esse semper
in ratione composita ex tribus reciprocis rationibus, distantise ipsarum a massa tertia, sinus
anguli, quern singularum directio continet cum sua ejusmodi distantia, & massae ipsius earn
habentis compositam vim, ad distantiam, sinum, massam alteram ; vires autem motrices
habere tantummodo priores rationes duas elisa tertia.

321 Eorum theorematum fructum colligo deducens inde usque ad num. 328, quae ad

aequilibrium pertinent divergentium utcumque virium, & ipsius aequilibrii centrum, ac
nisum centri in fulcrum, & quae ad prseponderantiam, Theoriam extendens ad casum etiam,
quo massae non in se invicem agant mutuo immediate, sed per intermedias alias, quse nexum
concilient, & virgarum nectentium suppleant vices, ac ad massas etiam quotcunque, quarum
singulas cum centro conversionis, & alia quavis assumpta massa connexas concipio, unde
principium momenti deduce pro machinis omnibus : turn omnium vectium genera evolvo,
ut & illud, facta suspensione per centrum gravitatis haberi aequilibrium, sed in ipso centro
debere sentiri vim a fulcro, vel sustinente puncto, sequalem summae ponderum totius
systematis, unde demum pateat ejus ratio, quod passim sine demonstratione assumitur,
nimirum systemate quiescente, & impedito omni partium motu per aequilibrium, totam
massam concipi posse ut in centro gravitatis collectam.

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 27

I supply, & I bring forward a certain example of the same sort, that deals with the multi-
plication of numbers, & to the composition of forces by the parallelogram law ; the latter
I prove by another more general method, analogous to that which I use in the general
investigation for the centre of gravity. Then by its help I prove very expeditiously &
with extreme rigour that well-known theorem of Newton, in which he affirmed that the
state of the centre of gravity is in no way altered by the internal mutual forces.

I gather several good results from this method of treatment. In Art. 264, the con- 264
servation of the same quantity of motion in the Universe in one plane ; in Art. 265 the 265
equality of action and reaction amongst masses ; then the collision of solid bodies, and the 266
communication of motions in direct impacts & the laws that govern them, & from that, 276
in Art. 276, oblique impacts ; in Art. 277 I reduce the theory of these from resolution of 277
motions to compositions, & in the article that follows, Art. 278, I pass to impact on to a 278
fixed plane; from Art. 279 to Art. 289 I show that there can be no real resolution of forces 279
or of motions in Nature, but only a hypothetical one ; & in this connection I consider &
explain all sorts of cases, in which at first sight it would seem that there must be resolution.

From Art. 289 to Art. 297, 1 state the laws for the composition & resolution of forces ; 289
here also I give the explanation of that well-known fact, that force decreases in composition,
increases in resolution, but always remains equal to the sum of the parts acting in the same
direction as itself in the first, the rest being equal & opposite cancel one another ; whilst
in the second, all that is done is to suppose that two equal & opposite forces are added on,
which supposition has no effect on the phenomena. Thus it comes about that nothing
can be deduced from this in favour of the Theory of living forces, since everything can be
explained without them ; in the same connection, I explain also many of the phenomena,
which are usually brought forward as evidence in favour of these ' living forces.'

In Art. 297, I seize the opportunity offered by the results just mentioned to attack 207
certain matters that relate to the law of continuity, which in all cases of motion is strictly
observed ; & I show that, in the collision of solid bodies, & in reflected motion, the laws,
as usually stated, are therefore only approximately followed. From this, as far as Art. 307,
I make out the various relations between the angles of incidence & reflection, whether the
forces, as the bodies approach one another, continually attract, or continually repel, or
attract at one time & repel at another. I also consider what will happen if the roughness
of the acting surface is very slight, & what if it is very great. I also state the first principles,
derived from mechanics, that are required for the explanation & determination of the
reflection & refraction of light ; also the relation of the absolute to the relative force in
the oblique descent of heavy bodies ; & some theorems that are requisite for the more
accurate theory of oscillations ; these, though quite elementary, I explain with great care.

From Art. 307 onwards, I investigate the system of three bodies ; in this connection,
as far as Art. 313, I evolve several theorems dealing with the direction of the forces on each
one of the three compounded from the combined actions of the other two ; such as the
theorem, that these directions are either all parallel to one another, or all pass through
some one common point, when they are produced indefinitely on both sides. Then, as ^j,
far as Art. 321, I make out several other theorems dealing with the ratios of these same
resultant forces to one another ; such as the following very simple & elegant theorem, that
the accelerating forces of two of the masses will always be in a ratio compounded of three
reciprocal ratios ; namely, that of the distance of either one of them from the third mass,
that of the sine of the angle which the direction of each force makes with the corresponding
distance of this kind, & that of the mass itself on which the force is acting, to the corre-
sponding distance, sine and mass for the other : also that the motive forces only have the
first two ratios, that of the masses being omitted.

I then collect the results to be derived from these theorems, deriving from them, as far ,2I
as Art. 328, theorems relating to the equilibrium of forces diverging in any manner, & the
centre of equilibrium, & the pressure of the centre on a fulcrum. I extend the theorem
relating to preponderance to the case also, in which the masses do not mutually act upon
one another in a direct manner, but through others intermediate between them, which
connect them together, & supply the place of rods joining them ; and also to any number of
masses, each of which I suppose to be connected with the centre of rotation & some other
assumed mass, & from this I derive the principles of moments for all machines. Then I
consider all the different kinds of levers ; one of the theorems that I obtain is, that, if a
lever is suspended from the centre of gravity, then there is equilibrium ; but a force should
be felt in this centre from the fulcrum or sustaining point, equal to the sum of the weights
of the whole system ; from which there follows most clearly the reason, which is every-
where assumed without proof, why the whole mass can be supposed to be collected at its
centre of gravity, so long as the system is in a state of rest & all motions of its parts are pro-
hibited by equilibrium.

28 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

328 A num. 328 ad 347 deduce ex iisdem theorematis, quae pertinent ad centrum oscilla-

tionis quotcunque massarum, sive sint in eadem recta, sive in piano perpendiculari ad axem
rotationis ubicunque, quse Theoria per systema quatuor massarum, excolendum aliquanto
diligentius, uberius promoveri deberet & extendi ad generalem habendum solidorum nexum,

344 qua re indicata, centrum itidem percussionis inde evolve, & ejus analogiam cum centre
oscillationis exhibeo.

347 Collecto ejusmodi fructu ex theorematis pertinentibus ad massas tres, innuo num. 347,
quae mihi communia sint cum ceteris omnibus, & cum Newtonianis potissimum, pertinentia
ad summas virium, quas habet punctum, vel massa attracta, vel repulsa a punctis singulis

348 alterius massae ; turn a num. 348 ad finem hujus partis, sive ad num. 358, expono quasdam,
quae pertinent ad fluidorum Theoriam, & primo quidem ad pressionem, ubi illud innuo
demonstratum a Newtono, si compressio fluidi sit proportionalis vi comprimenti, vires
repulsivas punctorum esse in ratione reciproca distantiarum, ac vice versa : ostendo autem
illud, si eadem vis sit insensibilis, rem, praeter alias curvas, exponi posse per Logisticam,
& in fluidis gravitate nostra terrestri prseditis pressiones haberi debere ut altitudines ;
deinde vero attingo ilia etiam, quae pertinent ad velocitatem fluidi erumpentis e vase, &
expono, quid requiratur, ut ea sit sequalis velocitati, quae acquiretur cadendo per altitudinem
ipsam, quemadmodum videtur res obtingere in aquae efHuxu : quibus partim expositis,
partim indicatis, hanc secundam partem conclude.

PARS III

358 Num. 358 propono argumentum hujus tertise partis, in qua omnes e Theoria mea

360 generales materis proprietates deduce, & particulares plerasque : turn usque ad num. 371
ago aliquanto fusius de impenetrabilitate, quam duplicis generis agnosco in meis punctorum
inextensorum massis, ubi etiam de ea apparenti quadam compenetratione ago, ac de luminis
trarlsitu per substantias intimas sine vera compenetratione, & mira quaedam phenomena

371 hue pertinentia explico admodum expedite. Inde ad num. 375 de extensione ago, quae
mihi quidem in materia, & corporibus non est continua, sed adhuc eadem praebet phaeno-
menae sensibus, ac in communi sententia ; ubi etiam de Geometria ago, quae vim suam in

375 mea Theoria retinet omnem : turn ad num. 383 figurabilitatem perseqUor, ac molem,
massam, densitatem singillatim, in quibus omnibus sunt quaedam Theoriae meae propria

383 scitu non indigna. De Mobilitate, & Motuum Continuitate, usque ad num. 388 notatu

388 digna continentur : turn usque ad num. 391 ago de aequalitate actionis, & reactionis, cujus
consectaria vires ipsas, quibus Theoria mea innititur, mirum in modum conformant.
Succedit usque ad num. 398 divisibilitas, quam ego ita admitto, ut quaevis massa existens
numerum punctorum realium habeat finitum tantummodo, sed qui in data quavis mole
possit esse utcunque magnus ; quamobrem divisibilitati in infinitum vulgo admissae sub-
stituo componibilitatem in infinitum, ipsi, quod ad Naturae phenomena explicanda

398 pertinet, prorsus aequivalentem. His evolutis addo num. 398 immutabilitatem primorum
materiae elementorum, quse cum mihi sint simplicia prorsus, & inextensa, sunt utique
immutabilia, & ad exhibendam perennem phasnomenorum seriem aptissima.

399 A num. 399 ad 406 gravitatem deduco ex mea virium Theoria, tanquam ramum

quendam e communi trunco, ubi & illud expono, qui fieri possit, ut fixae in unicam massam

406 non coalescant, quod gravitas generalis requirere videretur. Inde ad num. 419 ago de
cohaesione, qui est itidem veluti alter quidam ramus, quam ostendo, nee in quiete con-
sistere, nee in motu conspirante, nee in pressione fluidi cujuspiam, nee in attractione
maxima in contactu, sed in limitibus inter repulsionem, & attractionem ; ubi & problema
generale propono quoddam hue pertinens, & illud explico, cur massa fracta non iterum
coalescat, cur fibrae ante fractionem distendantur, vel contrahantur, & innuo, quae ad
cohaesionem pertinentia mihi cum reliquis Philosophis communia sint.

419 A cohacsione gradum facio num. 419 ad particulas, quae ex punctis cohaerentibus

efformantur, de quibus .ago usque ad num. 426. & varia persequor earum discrimina :

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 29

From Art. 328 to Art. 347, I deduce from these same theorems, others that relate to 328
the centre of oscillation of any number of masses, whether they are in the same right line,
or anywhere in a plane perpendicular to the axis of rotation ; this theory wants to be worked
somewhat more carefully with a system of four bodies, to be gone into more fully, & to
be extended so as to include the general case of a system of solid bodies ; having stated
this, I evolve from it the centre of percussion, & I show the analogy between it & the centre 344
of oscillation.

I obtain all such results from theorems relating to three masses. After that, in Art. 347
347, I intimate the matters in which I agree with all others, & especially with the followers
of Newton, concerning sums of forces, acting on a point, or an attracted or repelled mass,
due to the separate points of another mass. Then, from Art. 348 to the end of this part, 348
i.e., as far as Art. 359, I expound certain theorems that belong to the theory of fluids ; &
first of all, theorems with regard to pressure, in connection with which I mention that one
which was proved by Newton, namely, that, if the compression of a fluid is proportional to
the compressing force, then the repulsive forces between the points are in the reciprocal
ratio of the distances, & conversely. Moreover, I show that, if the same force is insen-
sible, then the matter can be represented by the logistic & other curves ; also that in fluids
subject to our terrestrial gravity pressures should be found proportional to the depths.
After that, I touch upon those things that relate to the velocity of a fluid issuing from a
vessel ; & I show what is necessary in order that this should be equal to the velocity which
would be acquired by falling through the depth itself, just as it is seen to happen in the
case of an efflux of water. These things in some part being explained, & in some part
merely indicated, I bring this second part to an end.

PART III

In Art. 358, I state the theme of this third part ; in it I derive all the general & most 358
of the special, properties of matter from my Theory. Then, as far as Art. 371, I deal some- 360
what more at length with the subject of impenetrability, which I remark is of a twofold
kind in my masses of non-extended points ; in this connection also, I deal with a certain
apparent case of compenetrability, & the passage of light through the innermost parts of
bodies without real compenetration ; I also explain in a very summary manner several
striking phenomena relating to the above. From here on to Art. 375, I deal with exten- 371
sion ; this in my opinion is not continuous either in matter or in solid bodies, & yet it
yields the same phenomena to the senses as does the usually accepted idea of it ; here I
also deal with geometry, which conserves all its power under my Theory. Then, as far 375
as Art. 383, I discuss figurability, volume, mass & density, each in turn ; in all of these
subjects there are certain special points of my Theory that are not unworthy of investi-
gation. Important theorems on mobility & continuity of motions are to be found from
here on to Art. 388 ; then, as far as Art. 391, I deal with the equality of action & reaction,
& my conclusions with regard to the subject corroborate in a wonderful way the hypothesis
of those forces, upon which my Theory depends. Then follows divisibility, as far as Art. 39 1
398 ; this principle I admit only to the extent that any existing mass may be made up of
a number of real points that are finite only, although in any given mass this finite number
may be as great as you please. Hence for infinite divisibility, as commonly accepted, I
substitute infinite multiplicity ; which comes to exactly the same thing, as far as it is
concerned with the explanation of the phenomena of Nature. Having considered these
subjects I add, in Art. 398, that of the immutability of the primary elements of matter ; 398
according to my idea, these are quite simple in composition, of no extent, they are every-
where unchangeable, & hence are splendidly adapted for explaining a continually recurring
set of phenomena.

From Art. 399 to Art. 406, 1 derive gravity from my Theory of forces, as if it were a 399
particular branch on a common trunk ; in this connection also I explain how it can happen
that the fixed stars do not all coalesce into one mass, as would seem to be required under 406
universal gravitation. Then, as far as Art. 419, I deal with cohesion, which is also as it
were another branch ; I show that this is not dependent upon quiescence, nor on motion
that is the same for all parts, nor on the pressure of some fluid, nor on the idea that the
attraction is greatest at actual contact, but on the limits between repulsion and attraction.
I propose, & solve, a general problem relating to this, namely, why masses, once broken,
do not again stick together, why the fibres are stretched or contracted before fracture
takes place ; & I intimate which of my ideas relative to cohesion are the same as those
held by other philosophers.

In Art. 419, 1 pass on from cohesion to particles which are formed from a number of 4J9
cohering points ; & I consider these as far as Art. 426, & investigate the various distinctions

30 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

ostendo nimirum, quo pacto varias induere possint figuras quascunque, quarum tenacissime
sint ; possint autem data quavis figura discrepare plurimum in numero, & distributione
punctorum, unde & oriantur admodum inter se diversae vires unius particulae in aliam, ac
itidem diversae in diversis partibus ejusdem particulae respectu diversarum partium, vel
etiam respectu ejusdem partis particulse alterius, cum a solo numero, & distributione
punctorum pendeat illud, ut data particula datam aliam in datis earum distantiis, &
superficierum locis, vel attrahat, vel repellat, vel respectu ipsius sit prorsus iners : turn illud
addo, particulas eo dimcilius dissolubiles esse, quo minores sint ; debere autem in gravitate
esse penitus uniformes, quaecunque punctorum dispositio habeatur, & in aliis proprietatibus
plerisque debere esse admodum (uti observamus) diversas, quae diversitas multo major in
majoribus massis esse debeat.

426 A num. 426 ad 446 de solidis, & fluidis, quod discrimen itidem pertinet ad varia

cohaesionum genera ; & discrimen inter solida, & fluida diligenter expono, horum naturam
potissimum repetens ex motu faciliori particularum in gyrum circa alias, atque id ipsum ex
viribus circumquaque aequalibus ; illorum vero ex inaequalitate virium, & viribus quibusdam
in latus, quibus certam positionem ad se invicem servare debeant. Varia autem distinguo
fluidorum genera, & discrimen profero inter virgas rigidas, flexiles, elasticas, fragiles, ut &
de viscositate, & humiditate ago, ac de organicis, & ad certas figuras determinatis corporibus,
quorum efformatio nullam habet difficultatem, ubi una particula unam aliam possit in
certis tantummodo superficiei partibus attrahere, & proinde cogere ad certam quandam
positionem acquirendam respectu ipsius, & retinendam. Demonstro autem & illud, posse
admodum facile ex certis particularum figuris, quarum ipsae tenacissimae sint, totum etiam
Atomistarum, & Corpuscularium systema a mea Theoria repeti ita, ut id nihil sit aliud,
nisi unicus itidem hujus veluti trunci foecundissimi ramus e diversa cohaesionis ratione
prorumpens. Demum ostendo, cur non quaevis massa, utut constans ex homogeneis
punctis, & circa se maxime in gyrum mobilibus, fluida sit ; & fluidorum resistentiam quoque
attingo, in ejus leges inquirens.

446 A num. 446 ad 450 ago de iis, quae itidem ad diversa pertinent soliditatis genera, nimirum

de elasticis, & mollibus, ilia repetens a magna inter limites proximos distantia, qua fiat, ut
puncta longe dimota a locis suis, idem ubique genus virium sentiant, & proinde se ad
priorem restituant locum ; hasc a limitum frequentia, atque ingenti vicinia, qua fiat, ut ex
uno ad alium delata limitem puncta, ibi quiescant itidem respective, ut prius. Turn vero
de ductilibus, & malleabilibus ago, ostendens, in quo a fragilibus discrepent : ostendo autem,
haec omnia discrimina a densitate nullo modo pendere, ut nimirum corpus, quod
multo sit altero densius, possit tarn multo majorem, quam multo minorem soliditatem, &
cohaesionem habere, & quaevis ex proprietatibus expositis aeque possit cum quavis vel majore,
vel minore densitate componi.

450 Num. 450 inquire in vulgaria quatuor elementa ; turn a num. 451 ad num. 467 persequor

452 chemicas operationes ; num. 452 explicans dissolutionem, 453 praecipitationem, 454, & 455
commixtionem plurium substantiarum in unam : turn num. 456, & 457 liquationem binis
methodis, 458 volatilizationem, & effervescentiam, 461 emissionem efHuviorum, quae e massa
constanti debeat esse ad sensum constans, 462 ebullitionem cum variis evaporationum
generibus ; 463 deflagrationem, & generationem aeris ; 464 crystallizationem cum certis
figuris ; ac demum ostendo illud num. 465, quo pacto possit fermentatio desinere ; & num.
466, quo pacto non omnia fermentescant cum omnibus.

467 A fermentatione num. 467 gradum facio ad ignem, qui mihi est fermentatio quaedam

substantiae lucis cum sulphurea quadam substantia, ac plura inde consectaria deduce usque

471 ad num. 471 ; turn ab igne ad lumen ibidem transeo, cujus proprietates praecipuas, ex

472 quibus omnia lucis phaenomena oriuntur, propono num. 472, ac singulas a Theoria mea
deduce, & fuse explico usque ad num. 503, nimirum emissionem num. 473, celeritatem 474,
propagationem rectilineam per media homogenea, & apparentem tantummodo compene-
trationem a num. 475 ad 483, pellucidatem, & opacitatem num. 483, reflexionem ad angulos
aequales inde ad 484, refractionem ad 487, tenuitatem num. 487, calorem, & ingentes
intestines motus allapsu tenuissimae lucis genitos, num. 488, actionem majorem corporum
eleosorum, & sulphurosorum in lumen num. 489 : turn num. 490 ostendo, nullam resist-

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 31

between them. I show how it is possible for various shapes of all sorts to be assumed,
which offer great resistance to rupture ; & how in a given shape they may differ very greatly
in the number & disposition of the points forming them. Also that from this fact there
arise very different forces for the action of one particle upon another, & also for the action
of different parts of this particle upon other different parts of it, or on the same part of
another particle. For that depends solely on the number & distribution of the points,
so that one given particle either attracts, or repels, or is perfectly inert with regard to
another given particle, the distances between them and the positions of their surfaces being
also given. Then I state in addition that the smaller the particles, the greater is the diffi-
culty in dissociating them ; moreover, that they ought to be quite uniform as regards
gravitation, no matter what the disposition of the points may be ; but in most other
properties they should be quite different from one another (which we observe to be the
case) ; & that this difference ought to be much greater in larger masses.

From Art. 426 to Art. 446, 1 consider solids & fluids, the difference between which is 426
also a matter of different kinds of cohesion. I explain with great care the difference
between solids & fluids ; deriving the nature of the latter from the greater freedom of motion
of the particles in the matter of rotation about one another, this being due to the forces
being nearly equal ; & that of the former from the inequality of the forces, and from certain
lateral forces which help them to keep a definite position with regard to one another. I
distinguish between various kinds of fluids also, & I cite the distinction between rigid,
flexible, elastic & fragile rods, when I deal with viscosity & humidity ; & also in dealing with
organic bodies & those solids bounded by certain fixed figures, of which the formation
presents no difficulty ; in these one particle can only attract another particle in certain
parts of the surface, & thus urge it to take up some definite position with regard to itself,
& keep it there. I also show that the whole system of the Atomists, & also of the Corpus-
cularians, can be quite easily derived by my Theory, from the idea of particles of definite
shape, offering a high resistance to deformation ; so that it comes to nothing else than
another single branch of this so to speak most fertile trunk, breaking forth from it
on account of a different manner of cohesion. Lastly, I show the reason why it is that
not every mass, in spite of its being constantly made up of homogeneous points, & even
these in a high degree capable of rotary motion about one another, is a fluid. I also touch
upon the resistance of fluids, & investigate the laws that govern it.

From Art. 446 to Art. 450, I deal with those things that relate to the different kinds 446
of solidity, that is to say, with elastic bodies, & those that are soft. I attribute the nature
of the former to the existence of a large interval between the consecutive limits, on account
of which it comes about that points that are far removed from their natural positions still
feel the effects of the same kind of forces, & therefore return to their natural positions ;
& that of the latter to the frequency & great closeness of the limits, on account of which it
comes about that points that have been moved from one limit to another, remain there
in relative rest as they were to start with. Then I deal with ductile and malleable solids,
pointing out how they differ from fragile solids. Moreover I show that all these differ-
ences are in no way dependent on density ; so that, for instance, a body that is much more
dense than another body may have either a much greater or a much less solidity and
cohesion than another ; in fact, any of the properties set forth may just as well be combined
with any density either greater or less.

In Art. 450 I consider what are commonly called the " four elements " ; then from 450
Art. 451 to Art. 467, I treat of chemical operations ; I explain solution in Art. 452, preci- 452
pitation in Art. 453, the mixture of several substances to form a single mass in Art. 454,
455, liquefaction by two methods in Art. 456, 457, volatilization & effervescence in Art.
458, emission of effluvia (which from a constant mass ought to be approximately constant)
in. Art. 461, ebullition & various kinds of evaporation in Art. 462, deflagration & generation
of gas in Art. 463, crystallization with definite forms of crystals in Art. 464 ; & lastly, I show,
in Art. 465, how it is possible for fermentation to cease, & in Art. 466, how it is that any
one thing does not ferment when mixed with any other thing.

From fermentation I pass on, in Art. 467, to fire, which I look upon as a fermentation 467
of some substance in light with some sulphureal substance ; & from this I deduce several
propositions, up to Art. 471. There I pass on from fire to light, the chief properties of 471
which, from which all the phenomena of light arise, I set forth in Art. 472 ; & I deduce 472
& fully explain each of them in turn as far as Art. 503. Thus, emission in Art. 473, velo-
city in Art. 474, rectilinear propagation in homogeneous media, & a compenetration that
is merely apparent, from Art. 475 on to Art. 483, pellucidity & opacity in Art. 483, reflec-
tion at equal angles to Art. 484, & refraction to Art. 487, tenuity in Art. 487, heat & the
great internal motions arising from the smooth passage of the extremely tenuous light in
Art. 488, the greater action of oleose & sulphurous bodies on light in Art. 489. Then I

32 SYNOPSIS TOTIUS OPERIS

entiam veram pati, ac num. 491 explico, unde sint phosphora, num. 492 cur lumen cum
majo e obliquitate incidens reflectatur magis, num. 493 & 494 unde diversa refrangibilitas
ortum ducat, ac num. 495, & 496 deduce duas diversas dispositiones ad asqualia redeuntes
intervalla, unde num. 497 vices illas a Newtono detectas facilioris reflexionis, & facilioris
transmissus eruo, & num. 498 illud, radios alios debere reflecti, alios transmitti in appulsu
ad novum medium, & eo plures reflecti, quo obliquitas incidentise sit major, ac num.
499 & 500 expono, unde discrimen in intervallis vicium, ex quo uno omnis naturalium
colorum pendet Newtoniana Theoria. Demum num. 501 miram attingo crystalli
Islandicse proprietatem, & ejusdem causam, ac num. 502 diffractionem expono, quse est
quaedam inchoata refractio, sive reflexio.

503 Post lucem ex igne derivatam, quse ad oculos pertinet, ago brevissime num. 503 de

504 sapore, & odore, ac sequentibus tribus numeris de sono : turn aliis quator de tactu, ubi
507 etiam de frigore, & calore : deinde vero usque ad num. 514 de electricitate, ubi totam
511 Franklinianam Theoriam ex meis principiis explico, eandem ad bina tantummodo reducens

principia, quse ex mea generali virium Theoria eodem fere pacto deducuntur, quo prsecipi-
514 tationes, atque dissolutiones. Demum num. 514, ac 515 magnetismum persequor, tam
directionem explicans, quam attractionem magneticam.

516 Hisce expositis, quas ad particulares .etiam proprietates pertinent, iterum a num. 516

ad finem usque generalem corporum complector naturam, & quid materia sit, quid forma,
quse censeri debeant essentialia, quse accidentialia attributa, adeoque quid transformatio
sit, quid alteratio, singillatim persequor, & partem hanc tertiam Theorise mesa absolve.

De Appendice ad Metaphysicam pertinente innuam hie illud tantummodo, me ibi
exponere de anima illud inprimis, quantum spiritus a materia differat, quern nexum anima
habeat cum corpore, & quomodo in ipsum agat : turn de DEO, ipsius & existentiam me
pluribus evincere, quae nexum habeant cum ipsa Theoria mea, & Sapientiam inprimis, ac
Providentiam, ex qua gradum ad revelationem faciendum innuo tantummodo. Sed hsec
in antecessum veluti delibasse sit satis.

SYNOPSIS OF THE WHOLE WORK 33

show, in Art. 490, that it suffers no real resistance, & in Art. 491 I explain the origin of
bodies emitting light, in Art. 492 the reason why light that falls with greater obliquity
is reflected more strongly, in Art. 493, 494 the origin of different degrees of refrangibility,
& in Art. 495, 496 I deduce that there are two different dispositions recurring at equal
intervals ; hence, in Art. 497, I bring out those alternations, discovered by Newton, of
easier reflection & easier transmission, & in Art. 498 I deduce that some rays should be
reflected & others transmitted in the passage to a fresh medium, & that the greater the obli-
quity of incidence, the greater the number of reflected rays. In Art. 499, 500 I state the
origin of the difference between the lengths of the intervals of the alternations ; upon this
alone depends the whole of the Newtonian theory of natural colours. Finally, in Art. 501,
I touch upon the wonderful property of Iceland spar & its cause, & in Art. 502 I explain
diffraction, which is a kind of imperfect refraction or reflection.

After light derived from fire, which has to do with vision, I very briefly deal with
taste & smell in Art. 503, £ of sound in the three articles that follow next. Then, in the S°3
next four articles, I consider touch, & in connection with it, cold & heat also. After that, 5°4
as far as Art. 514, I deal with electricity ; here I explain the whole of the Franklin theory 5°7
by means of my principles ; I reduce this theory to two principles only, & these are 5 1 1
derived from my general Theory of forces in almost the same manner as I have already derived
precipitations & solutions. Finally, in Art. 514, 515, I investigate magnetism, explaining 5H
both magnetic direction £ attraction.

These things being expounded, all of which relate to special properties, I once more
consider, in the articles from 516 to the end, the general nature of bodies, what matter is, 516
its form, what things ought to be considered as essential, & what as accidental, attributes ;
and also the nature of transformation and alteration are investigated, each in turn ; &
thus I bring to a close the third part of my Theory.

I will mention here but this one thing with regard to the appendix on Metaphysics ;
namely, that I there expound more especially how greatly different is the soul from matter,
the connection between the soul & the body, & the manner of its action upon it. Then
with regard to GOD, I prove that He must exist by many arguments that have a close con-
nection with this Theory of mine ; I especially mention, though but slightly, His Wisdom
and Providence, from which there is but a step to be made towards revelation. But I think
that I have, so to speak, given my preliminary foretaste quite sufficiently.

[I] PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

In quo conveniat
cum systemate
Newtoniano, &
Leibnitiano.

Cujusmodi systema>
Theoria exhibeat.

PARS I

Theorice expositio, analytica deductio^ & vindicatio.

lRIUM mutuarum Theoria, in quam incidi jam ab Anno 1745, dum e
notissimis principiis alia ex aliis consectaria eruerem, & ex qua ipsam
simplicium materise elementorum constitutionem deduxi, systema
exhibet medium inter Leibnitianum, & Newtonianum, quod nimirum
& ex utroque habet plurimum, & ab utroque plurimum dissidet ; at
utroque in immensum simplicius, proprietatibus corporum generalibus
sane omnibus, & [2] peculiaribus quibusque praecipuis per accuratissimas
demonstrationes deducendis est profecto mirum in modum idoneum.

2. Habet id quidem ex Leibnitii Theoria elementa prima simplicia, ac prorsus inex-
tensa : habet ex Newtoniano systemate vires mutuas, quae pro aliis punctorum distantiis a
se invicem aliae sint ; & quidem ex ipso itidem Newtono non ejusmodi vires tantummodo,
quse ipsa puncta determinent ad accessum, quas vulgo attractiones nominant ; sed etiam
ejusmodi, quae determinent ad recessum, & appellantur repulsiones : atque id ipsum ita,
ut, ubi attractio desinat, ibi, mutata distantia, incipiat repulsio, & vice versa, quod nimirum
Newtonus idem in postrema Opticse Quaestione proposuit, ac exemplo transitus a positivis
ad negativa, qui habetur in algebraicis formulis, illustravit. Illud autem utrique systemati
commune est cum hoc meo, quod quaevis particula materiae cum aliis quibusvis, utcunque
remotis, ita connectitur, ut ad mutationem utcunque exiguam in positione unius cujusvis,
determinationes ad motum in omnibus reliquis immutentur, & nisi forte elidantur omnes
oppositas, qui casus est infinities improbabilis, motus in iis omnibus aliquis inde ortus
habeatur.

In quo differat a
Leibnitiano & ipsi
praestet.

3. Distat autem a Leibnitiana Theoria longissime, turn quia nullam extensionem
continuam admittit, quae ex contiguis, & se contingentibus inextensis oriatur : in quo
quidem dirficultas jam olim contra Zenonem proposita, & nunquam sane aut soluta satis,
aut solvenda, de compenetratione omnimoda inextensorum contiguorum, eandem vim
adhuc habet contra Leibnitianum systema : turn quia homogeneitatem admittit in elementis,
omni massarum discrimine a sola dispositione, & diversa combinatione derivato, ad quam
homogeneitatem in elementis, & discriminis rationem in massis, ipsa nos Naturae analogia
ducit, ac chemicae resolutiones inprimis, in quibus cum ad adeo pauciora numero, & adeo
minus inter se diversa principiorum genera, in compositorum corporum analysi deveniatur,
id ipsum indicio est, quo ulterius promoveri possit analysis, eo ad majorem simplicitatem,
& homogeneitatem devenire debere, adeoque in ultima demum resolutione ad homogenei-
tatem, & simplicitatem summam, contra quam quidem indiscernibilium principium, &
principium rationis sufficients usque adeo a Leibnitianis depraedicata, meo quidem judicio,
nihil omnino possunt.

in quo differat a A Distat itidem a Newtoniano systemate quamplunmum, turn in eo, quod ea, quae

Newtoniano & ipsi XT . . r\ • r\ • r

praestet. Newtonus in ipsa postremo (Juaestione (Jpticae conatus est expncare per tna pnncipia,

gravitatis, cohsesionis, fermentationis, immo & reliqua quamplurima, quae ab iis tribus
principiis omnino non pendent, per unicam explicat legem virium, expressam unica, & ex
pluribus inter se commixtis non composita algebraica formula, vel unica continua geometrica
curva : turn in eo, quod in mi-[3]-nimis distantiis vires admittat non positivas, sive
attractivas, uti Newtonus, sed negativas, sive repulsivas, quamvis itidem eo majores in

34

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

PART I

Exposition ^ ^Analytical Derivation & Proof of the Theory

I. ' ^i ^^ HE following Theory of mutual forces, which I lit upon as far back as the year The kind of sys-
1745, whilst I was studying various propositions arising from other very p^ents.6
well-known principles, & from which I have derived the very constitu-
tion of the simple elements of matter, presents a system that is midway
between that of Leibniz & that of Newton ; it has very much in common
with both, & differs very much from either ; &, as it is immensely more
simple than either, it is undoubtedly suitable in a marvellous degree for

deriving all the general properties of bodies, & certain of the special properties also, by

means of the most rigorous demonstrations.

2. It indeed holds to those simple & perfectly non-extended primary elements upon what there is in
which is founded the theory of Leibniz ; & also to the mutual forces, which vary as the * s£^"0"{ to$^
distances of the points from one another vary, the characteristic of the theory of Newton ; ton *& Leibniz.

in addition, it deals not only with the kind of forces, employed by Newton, which oblige
the points to approach one another, & are commonly called attractions ; but also it
considers forces of a kind that engender recession, & are called repulsions. Further, the
idea is introduced in such a manner that, where attraction ends, there, with a change of
distance, repulsion begins ; this idea, as a matter of fact, was suggested by Newton in the
last of his ' Questions on Optics ', & he illustrated it by the example of the passage from
positive to negative, as used in algebraical formulas. Moreover there is this common point
between either of the theories of Newton & Leibniz & my own ; namely, that any particle
of matter is connected with every other particle, no matter how great is the distance
between them, in such a way that, in accordance with a change in the position, no matter
how slight, of any one of them, the factors that determine the motions of all the rest are
altered ; &, unless it happens that they all cancel one another (& this is infinitely impro-
bable), some motion, due to the change of position in question, will take place in every one
of them.

3. But my Theory differs in a marked degree from that of Leibniz. For one thing, How it differs from,
because it does not admit the continuous extension that arises from the idea of consecutive,
non-extended points touching one another ; here, the difficulty raised in times gone by in

opposition to Zeno, & never really or satisfactorily answered (nor can it be answered), with
regard to compenetration of all kinds with non-extended consecutive points, still holds the
same force against the system of Leibniz. For another thing, it admits homogeneity
amongst the elements, all distinction between masses depending on relative position only,
& different combinations of the elements ; for this homogeneity amongst the elements, &
the reason for the difference amongst masses, Nature herself provides us with the analogy.
Chemical operations especially do so ; for, since the result of the analysis of compound
substances leads to classes of elementary substances that are so comparatively few in num-
ber, & still less different from one another in nature ; it strongly suggests that, the further
analysis can be pushed, the greater the simplicity, & homogeneity, that ought to be attained ;
thus, at length, we should have, as the result of a final decomposition, homogeneity &
simplicity of the highest degree. Against this homogeneity & simplicity, the principle of
indiscernibles, & the doctrine of sufficient reason, so long & strongly advocated by the
followers of Leibniz, can, in my opinion at least, avail in not the slightest degree.

4. My Theory also differs as widely as possible from that of Newton. For one thing, HOW it differs from,
because it explains by means of a single law of forces all those things that Newton himself, * surpasses, the

i i i i. . X • f-\ • , i • i theory of Newton.

in the last of his Questions on Uptics , endeavoured to explain by the three principles
of gravity, cohesion & fermentation ; nay, & very many other things as well, which do not
altogether follow from those three principles. Further, this law is expressed by a single
algebraical formula, & not by one composed of several formulae compounded together ; or
by a single continuous geometrical curve. For another thing, it admits forces that at very
small distances are not positive or attractive, as Newton supposed, but negative or repul-

35

missum.

36 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

infinitum, quo distantise in infinitum decrescant. Unde illud necessario consequitur, ut nee
cohaesio a contactu immediate oriatur, quam ego quidem longe aliunde desumo ; nee ullus
immediatus, &, ut ilium appellare soleo, mathematicus materiae contactus habeatur, quod
simplicitatem, & inextensionem inducit elementorum, quae ipse variarum figurarum voluit,
& partibus a se invicem distinctis composita, quamvis ita cohasrentia, ut nulla Naturae vi
dissolvi possit compages, & adhaesio labefactari, quas adhaesio ipsi, respectu virium nobis
cognitarum, est absolute infinita.

Ubi de ipsa ctum 5. Quae ad ejusmodi Theoriam pertinentia hucusque sunt edita, continentur disserta-

ante ; & quid pro- tionibus meis, De viribus vivis, edita Anno 1741;, De Lumine A. 1748, De Leee Continuitatis

ml«<mm " . T r^ ... . • . rj . ...

A. 1754, De Lege virium in natura existentium A. 1755, De divisibihtate materite, C5 principiis
corporum A. 1757, ac in meis Supplementis Stayanae Philosophiae versibus traditae, cujus primus
Tomus prodiit A. 1755 : eadem autem satis dilucide proposuit, & amplissimum ipsius per
omnem Physicam demonstravit usum vir e nostra Societate doctissimus Carolus Benvenutus
in sua Physics Generalis Synopsi edita Anno 1754. In ea Synopsi proposuit idem & meam
deductionem aequilibrii binarum massarum, viribus parallelis animatarum, quas ex ipsa mea
Theoria per notissimam legem compositionis virium, & aequalitatis inter actionem, & reac-
tionem, fere sponte consequitur, cujus quidem in supplementis illis § 4. ad lib. 3. mentionem
feci, ubi & quae in dissertatione De centra Gravitatis edideram, paucis proposui ; & de centre
oscillationis agens, protuli aliorum methodos praecipuas quasque, quae ipsius determinationem
a subsidiariis tantummodo principiis quibusdam repetunt. Ibidem autem de sequilibrii
centre agens illud affirmavi : In Natura nullce sunt rigidce virgce, infiexiles, & omni gravitate,
ac inertia carentes, adeoque nee revera ullce leges pro Us conditcz ; & si ad genuina, & simpli-
cissima natures principia, res exigatur, invenietur, omnia pendere a compositione virium, quibus in
se invicem agunt particula materice ; a quibus nimirum viribus omnia Natures pb&nomena
proficiscuntur. Ibidem autem exhibitis aliorum methodis ad centrum oscillationis perti-
nentibus, promisi, me in quarto ejusdem Philosophiae tomo ex genuinis principiis investiga-
turum, ut aequilibrii, sic itidem oscillationis centrum.

Qua occasione hoc 6. Porro cum nuper occasio se mihi praebuisset inquirendi in ipsum oscillationis centrum
turn 'opus." Cnp ex meis principiis, urgente Scherffero nostro viro doctissimo, qui in eodem hoc Academico
Societatis Collegio nostros Mathesim docet ; casu incidi in theorema simplicisimum sane, &
admodum elegans, quo trium massarum in se mutuo agentium comparantur vires, [4] quod
quidem ipsa fortasse tanta sua simplicitate effugit hucusque Mechanicorum oculos ; nisi
forte ne effugerit quidem, sed alicubi jam ab alio quopiam inventum, & editum, me, quod
admodum facile fieri potest, adhuc latuerit, ex quo theoremate & asquilibrium, ac omne
vectium genus, & momentorum mensura pro machinis, & oscillationis centrum etiam pro
casu, quo oscillatio fit in latus in piano ad axem oscillationis perpendiculari, & centrum
percussionis sponte fluunt, & quod ad sublimiores alias perquisitiones viam aperit admodum
patentem. Cogitaveram ego quidem initio brevi dissertatiuncula hoc theorema tantummodo
edere cum consectariis, ac breve Theoriae meae specimen quoddam exponere ; sed paullatim
excrevit opusculum, ut demum & Theoriam omnem exposuerim ordine suo, & vindicarim,
& ad Mechanicam prius, turn ad Physicam fere universam applicaverim, ubi & quae maxima
notatu digna erant, in memoratis dissertationibus ordine suo digessi omnia, & alia adjeci
quamplurima, quae vel olim animo conceperam, vel modo sese obtulerunt scribenti, & omnem
hanc rerum farraginem animo pervolventi.

eiementa in- 7. Prima elementa materiae mihi sunt puncta prorsus indivisibilia, & inextensa, quae in

imrftenso vacuo ita dispersa sunt, ut bina quaevis a se invicem distent per aliquod intervallum,
quod quidem indefinite augeri potest, & minui, sed penitus evanescere non potest, sine
conpenetratione ipsorum punctorum : eorum enim contiguitatem nullam admitto possi-
bilem ; sed illud arbitror omnino certum, si distantia duorum materiae punctorum sit nulla,
idem prorsus spatii vulgo concept! punctum indivisibile occupari ab utroque debere, &

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 37

sive ; although these also become greater & greater indefinitely, as the distances decrease
indefinitely. From this it follows of necessity that cohesion is not a consequence of imme-
diate contact, as I indeed deduce from totally different considerations ; nor is it possible
to get any immediate or, as I usually term it, mathematical contact between the parts of
matter. This idea naturally leads to simplicity & non-extension of the elements, such as
Newton himself postulated for various figures ; & to bodies composed of parts perfectly
distinct from one another, although bound together so closely that the ties could not be
broken or the adherence weakened by any force in Nature ; this adherence, as far as the
forces known to us are concerned, is in his opinion unlimited.

5. What has already been published relating to this kind of Theory is contained in my when & where I
dissertations, De Viribus vivis, issued in 1745, De Lumine, 1748, De Lege Continuitatis, *£££ th^theory'*
1754, De Lege virium in natura existentium, 1755, De divisibilitate materia, y principiis & a promise that i
corporum, 1757, & in my Supplements to the philosophy of Benedictus Stay, issued in verse, made>

of which the first volume was published in 1755. The same theory was set forth with
considerable lucidity, & its extremely wide utility in the matter of the whole of Physics
was demonstrated, by a learned member of our Society, Carolus Benvenutus, in his Physics
Generalis Synopsis published in 1754. In this synopsis he also at the same time gave my
deduction of the equilibrium of a pair of masses actuated by parallel forces, which follows
quite naturally from my Theory by the well-known law for the composition of forces, &
the equality between action & reaction ; this I mentioned in those Supplements, section
4 of book 3, & there also I set forth briefly what I had published in my dissertation De
centra Gravitatis. Further, dealing with the centre of oscillation, I stated the most note-
worthy methods of others who sought to derive the determination of this centre from
merely subsidiary principles. Here also, dealing with the centre of equilibrium, I asserted : —
" In Nature there are no rods that are rigid, inflexible, totally devoid of weight & inertia ;
y so, neither are there really any laws founded on them. If the matter is worked back to the
genuine W simplest natural principles, it will be found that everything depends on the com-
position of the forces with which the particles of matter act upon one another ; y from these
very forces, as a matter of fact, all phenomena of Nature take their origin." Moreover, here
too, having stated the methods of others for the determination of the centre of oscillation,
I promised that, in the fourth volume of the Philosophy, I would investigate by means of
genuine principles, such as I had used for the centre of equilibrium, the centre of
oscillation as well.

6. Now, lately I had occasion to investigate this centre of oscillation, deriving it from The occasion that
my own principles, at the request of Father Scherffer, a man of much learning, who teaches |^
mathematics in this College of the Society. Whilst doing this, I happened to hit upon a matter.

really most simple & truly elegant theorem, from which the forces with which three
masses mutually act upon one another are easily to be found ; this theorem, perchance
owing to its extreme simplicity, has escaped the notice of mechanicians up till now (unless
indeed perhaps it has not escaped notice, but has at some time previously been discovered
& published by some other person, though, as may very easily have happened, it may not
have come to my notice). From this theorem there come, as the natural consequences,
the equilibrium & all the different kinds of levers, the measurement of moments for
machines, the centre of oscillation for the case in which the oscillation takes place sideways
in a plane perpendicular to the axis of oscillation, & also the centre of percussion ; it opens
up also a beautifully clear road to other and more sublime investigations. Initially, my
idea was to publish in a short esssay merely this theorem & some deductions from it, & thus
to give some sort of brief specimen of my Theory. But little by little the essay grew in
length, until it ended in my setting forth in an orderly manner the whole of the theory,
giving a demonstration of its truth, & showing its application to Mechanics in the first place,
and then to almost the whole of Physics. To it I also added not only those matters that
seemed to me to be more especially worth mention, which had all been already set forth
in an orderly manner in the dissertations mentioned above, but also a large number of other
things, some of which had entered my mind previously, whilst others in some sort pb truded
themselves on my notice as I was writing & turning over in my mind all this conglomer-
ation of material.

7. The primary elements of matter are in my opinion perfectly indivisible & non- The primary eie-
extended points ; they are so scattered in an immense vacuum that every two of them are ^biVnon^xtended
separated from one another by a definite interval ; this interval can be indefinitely & they are not
increased or diminished, but can never vanish altogether without compenetration of the c

points themselves ; for I do not admit as possible any immediate contact between them.
On the contrary I consider that it is a certainty that, if the distance between two points
of matter should become absolutely nothing, then the very same indivisible point of space,
according to the usual idea of it, must be occupied by both together, & we have true

38 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

haberi veram, ac omnimodam conpenetrationem. Quamobrem non vacuum ego quidem
admitto disseminatum in materia, sed materiam in vacuo disseminatam, atque innatantem.

Eorum inertias vis g jn n;sce punctis admitto determinationem perseverandi in eodem statu quietis, vel

cujusmodi. . r . r. ,. , . . , . J . . • i * XT '

motus umiormis in directum l«) m quo semel sint posita, si seorsum smgula in JNatura
existant ; vel si alia alibi extant puncta, componendi per notam, & communem metho-
dum compositionis virium, & motuum, parallelogrammorum ope, praecedentem motum
cum mo-[5]-tu quern determinant vires mutuae, quas inter bina quaevis puncta agnosco
a distantiis pendentes, & iis mutatis mutatas, juxta generalem quandam omnibus com-
munem legem. In ea determinatione stat ilia, quam dicimus, inertiae vis, quae, an a
libera pendeat Supremi Conditoris lege, an ab ipsa punctorum natura, an ab aliquo iis
adjecto, quodcunque, istud sit, ego quidem non quaere ; nee vero, si velim quasrere, in-
veniendi spem habeo ; quod idem sane censeo de ea virium lege, ad quam gradum jam facio.

Eorundem vires g Censeo igitur bina quaecunque materiae puncta determinari asque in aliis distantiis

mutuae in alus , y •,.. , -1 . . .

distantiis attrac- ad mutuum accessum, in alns ad recessum mutuum, quam ipsam determinationem appello
tivae, in aliis re- vim, in priore casu attractivam, in posteriore repulsivam, eo nomine non agendi modum, sed

pulsivae : v i n u m . ,r . . . , '. . .

ejusmodi exempia. ipsam determinationem expnmens, undecunque provemat, cujus vero magnitude mutatis
distantiis mutetur & ipsa secundum certam legem quandam, quae per geometricam lineam
curvam, vel algebraicam formulam exponi possit, & oculis ipsis, uti moris est apud Mechanicos
repraesentari. Vis mutuae a distantia pendentis, & ea variata itidem variatae, atque ad omnes
in immensum & magnas, & parvas distantias pertinentis, habemus exemplum in ipsa
Newtoniana generali gravitate mutata in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum, qua;
idcirco numquam e positiva in negativam migrare potest, adeoque ab attractiva ad repul-
sivam, sive a determinatione ad accessum ad determinationem ad recessum nusquam migrat.
Verum in elastris inflexis habemus etiam imaginem ejusmodi vis mutuae variatae secundum
distantias, & a determinatione ad recessum migrantis in determinationem ad accessum, &
vice versa. Ibi enim si duae cuspides, compresso elastro, ad se invicem accedant, acquirunt
determinationem ad recessum, eo majorem, quo magis, compresso elastro, distantia
decrescit ; aucta distantia cuspidum, vis ad recessum minuitur, donee in quadam distantia
evanescat, & fiat prorsus nulla ; turn distantia adhuc aucta, incipit determinatio ad accessum,
quae perpetuo eo magis crescit, quo magis cuspides a se invicem recedunt : ac si e contrario
cuspidum distantia minuatur perpetuo ; determinatio ad accessum itidem minuetur,
evanescet, & in determinationem ad recessum mutabitur. Ea determinatio oritur utique
non ab immediata cuspidum actione in se invicem, sed a natura, & forma totius intermediae
laminae plicatae ; sed hie physicam rei causam non merer, & solum persequor exemplum
determinationis ad accessum, & recessum, quae determinatio in aliis distantiis alium habeat
nisum, & migret etiam ab altera in alteram.

virium earundero 10. Lex autem virium est ejusmodi, ut in minimis distantiis sint repulsivae, atque eo

majores in infmitum, quo distantiae ipsae minuuntur in infinitum, ita, ut pares sint extinguen-
[6]-dae cuivis velocitati utcunque magnae, cum qua punctum alterum ad alterum possit
accedere, antequam eorum distantia evanescat ; distantiis vero auctis minuuntur ita, ut in
quadam distantia perquam exigua evadat vis nulla : turn adhuc, aucta distantia, mutentur in
attractivas, prime quidem crescentes, turn decrescentes, evanescentes, abeuntes in repulsivas,
eodem pacto crescentes, deinde decrescentes, evanescentes, migrantes iterum in attractivas,
atque id per vices in distantiis plurimis, sed adhuc perquam exiguis, donee, ubi ad aliquanto
majores distantias ventum sit, incipiant esse perpetuo attractivae, & ad sensum reciproce

(a) Id quidem respectu ejus spatii, in quo continemur nos, W omnia quis nostris observari sensibus possunt, corpora ;
quod quiddam spatium si quiescat, nihil ego in ea re a reliquis differo ; si forte moveatur motu quopiam, quern motum
ex hujusmodi determinatione sequi debeant ipsa materia puncta ; turn bcec mea erit quiedam non absoluta, sed respectiva
inertia: vis, quam ego quidem exposui W in dissertatione De Maris aestu fcf in Supplementis Stayanis Lib. I. § 13 ;
ubi etiam illud occurrit, quam oh causam ejusmodi respectivam inertiam excogitarim, & quibus rationihus evinci putem,
absolutam omnino demonstrari non posse ; sed ea hue non pertinent.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 39

compenetration in every way. Therefore indeed I do not admit the idea of vacuum
interspersed amongst matter, but I consider that matter is interspersed in a vacuum &
floats in it.

8. As an attribute of these points I admit an inherent propensity to remain in the The nat.ure ?f the
same state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, («) in which they are initially the" possess.1*
set, if each exists by itself in Nature. But if there are also other points anywhere, there

is an inherent propensity to compound (according to the usual well-known composition of
forces & motions by the parallelogram law), the preceding motion with the motion which
is determined by the mutual forces that I admit to act between any two of them, depending
on the distances & changing, as the distances change, according to a certain law common
to them all. This propensity is the origin of what we call the ' force of inertia ' ; whether
this is dependent upon an arbitrary law of the Supreme Architect, or on the nature of points
itself, or on some attribute of them, whatever it may be, I do not seek to know ; even if I
did wish to do so, I see no hope of finding the answer ; and I truly think that this also
applies to the law of forces, to which I now pass on.

9. I therefore consider that any two points of matter are subject to a determination The mutual forces
to approach one another at some distances, & in an equal degree recede from one another at Stw^*^™!*
other distances. This determination I call ' force ' ; in the first case ' attractive ', in the distances & repui-
second case ' repulsive ' ; this term does not denote the mode of action, but the propen- ^mpies

sity itself, whatever its origin, of which the magnitude changes as the distances change ; this kind,
this is in accordance with a certain definite law, which can be represented by a geometrical
curve or by an algebraical formula, & visualized in the manner customary with Mechanicians.
We have an example of a force dependent on distance, & varying with varying distance, &
pertaining to all distances either great or small, throughout the vastness of space, in the
Newtonian idea of general gravitation that changes according to the inverse squares of the
distances : this, on account of the law governing it, can never pass from positive to nega-
tive ; & thus on no occasion does it pass from being attractive to being repulsive, i.e., from
a propensity to approach to a propensity to recession. Further, in bent springs we have
an illustration of that kind of mutual force that varies according as the distance varies, &
passes from a propensity to recession to a propensity to approach, and vice versa. For
here, if the two ends of the spring approach one another on compressing the spring, they
acquire a propensity for recession that is the greater, the more the distance diminishes
between them as the spring is compressed. But, if the distance between the ends is
increased, the force of recession is diminished, until at a certain distance it vanishes and
becomes absolutely nothing. Then, if the distance is still further increased, there begins a
propensity to approach, which increases more & more as the ends recede further & further
away from one another. If now, on the contrary, the distance between the ends is con-
tinually diminished, the propensity to approach also diminishes, vanishes, & becomes changed
into a propensity to recession. This propensity certainly does not arise from the imme-
diate action of the ends upon one another, but from the nature & form of the whole of the
folded plate of metal intervening. But I do not delay over the physical cause of the thing
at this juncture ; I only describe it as an example of a propensity to approach & recession,
this propensity being characterized by one endeavour at some distances & another at other
distances, & changing from one propensity to another.

10. Now the law of forces is of this kind ; the forces are repulsive at very small dis- The Iaw .of forces
tances, & become indefinitely greater & greater, as the distances are diminished indefinitely, for the pomts-

in such a manner that they are capable of destroying any velocity, no matter how large it
may be, with which one point may approach another, before ever the distance between
them vanishes. When the distance between them is increased, they are diminished in such
a way that at a certain distance, which is extremely small, the force becomes nothing.
Then as the distance is still further increased, the forces are change-d to attractive forces ;
these at first increase, then diminish, vanish, & become repulsive forces, which in the same
way first increase, then diminish, vanish, & become once more attractive ; & so on, in turn,
for a very great number of distances, which1 are all still very^ minute : until, finally, when
we get to comparatively great distances, they begin to be continually attractive & approxi-

(a) This indeed holds true for that space in which we, and all bodies that can be observed by our senses, are
contained. Now, if this space is at rest, I do not differ from other philosophers with regard to the matter in question ;
but if perchance space itself moves in some way or other, what motion ought these points of matter to comply with owing
to this kind of propensity ? In that case Ms force of inertia that I postulate is not absolute, but relative ; as indeed
I explained both in the dissertation De Maris Aestu, and also in the Supplements to Stay's Philosophy, book I, section
13. Here also will be found the conclusions at which I arrived with regard to relative inertia of this sort, and the
arguments by which I think it is proved that it is impossible to show that it is generally abxlute. But these things do
not concern us at present.

4°

PHILOSOPHI/E NATURALIS THEORIA

proportionales quadratis distantiarum, atque id vel utcunque augeantur distantiae etiam in
infinitum, vel saltern donee ad distantias deveniatur omnibus Planetarum, & Cometarum
distantiis longe majores.

Leg is simpiicitas ii. Hujusmodi lex primo aspectu videtur admodum complicata, & ex diversis legibus

exprimibihs per temere jnter se coagmentatis coalescens ; at simplicissima, & prorsus incomposita esse potest,

COIlLlIlUtllTl CUf VclIUi • t i • • • 1*1* A 1 1 " J" 1

expressa videlicet per unicam contmuam curvam, vel simphcem Algebraicam iormulam, uti
innui superius. Hujusmodi curva linea est admodum apta ad sistendam oculis ipsis ejusmodi
legem, nee requirit Geometram, ut id praestare possit : satis est, ut quis earn intueatur
tantummodo, & in ipsa ut in imagine quadam solemus intueri depictas res qualescunque,
virium illarum indolem contempletur. In ejusmodi curva eae, quas Geometrae abscissas
dicunt, & sunt segmenta axis, ad quern ipsa refertur curva, exprimunt distantias binorum
punctorum a se invicem : illae vero, quae dicuntur ordinatae, ac sunt perpendiculares lineee
ab axe ad curvam ductae, referunt vires : quae quidem, ubi ad alteram jacent axis partem,
exhibent vires attractivas ; ubi jacent ad alteram, rcpulsivas, & prout curva accedit ad axem,
vel recedit, minuuntur ipsae etiam, vel augentur : ubi curva axem secat, & ab altera ejus
parte transit ad alteram, mutantibus directionem ordinatis, abeunt ex positivis in negativas,
vel vice versa : ubi autem arcus curvae aliquis ad rectam quampiam axi perpendicularem
in infinitum productam semper magis accedit ita ultra quoscumque limites, ut nunquam in
earn recidat, quern arcum asymptoticum appellant Geometrae, ibi vires ipsae in infinitum
excrescunt.

Forma curvae ips-
ius.

12. Ejusmodi curvam exhibui, & exposui in dissertationibus De viribus vivis a Num. 51,
De Lumine Num. 5, De Lege virium in Naturam existentium a Num. 68, & in sua Synopsi
Physics Generalis P. Benvenutus eandem protulit a Num. 108. En brevem quandemejus
ideam. In Fig. i, Axis C'AC habet in puncto A asymptotum curvae rectilineam AB
indefinitam, circa quam habentur bini curvae rami hinc, & inde aequales, prorsus inter se, &
similes, quorum alter DEFGHIKLMNOPQRSTV habet inprimis arcum ED [7] asympto-
ticum, qui nimirum ad partes BD, si indefinite producatur ultra quoscunque limites, semper
magis accedit ad rectam AB productam ultra quoscunque limites, quin unquam ad eandem
deveniat ; hinc vero versus DE perpetuo recidit ab eadam recta, immo etiam perpetuo
versus V ab eadem recedunt arcus reliqui omnes, quin uspiam recessus mutetur in accessum.
Ad axem C'C perpetuo primum accedit, donee ad ipsum deveniat alicubi in E ; turn eodem
ibi secto progreditur, & ab ipso perpetuo recedit usque ad quandam distantiam F, postquam
recessum in accessum mutat, & iterum ipsum axem secat in G, ac flexibus continuis contor-
quetur circa ipsum, quern pariter secat in punctis quamplurimis, sed paucas admodum
ejusmodi sectiones figura exhibet, uti I, L, N, P, R. Demum is arcus desinit in alterum
crus TpsV, jacens ex parte opposita axis respectu primi cruris, quod alterum crus ipsum
habet axem pro asymptoto, & ad ipsum accedit ad sensum ita, ut distantiae ab ipso sint in
ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum a recta BA.

Abscissae exprimen-

d!nateStaexprimen-
tes vires.

13. Si ex quovis axis puncto a, b, d, erigatur usque ad curvam recta ipsi perpendicularis
aS> ^r' ^h , segmentum axis Aa, Ab, Ad, dicitur abscissa, & refert distantiam duorum materiae
punctorum quorumcunque a se invicem ; perpendicularis ag, br, db , dicitur ordinata, &
exhibet vim repulsivam, vel attractivam, prout jacet respectu axis ad partes D, vel oppositas.

Mutationes ordina-
tarum, & virium iis
expressarum.

14. Patet autem, in ea curvae forma ordinatam ag augeri ultra quoscunque limites, si
abscissa Aa, minuatur pariter ultra quoscunque limites ; quae si augeatur, ut abeat in Ab,
ordinata minuetur, & abibit in br, perpetuo imminutam in accessu b ad E, ubi evanescet :
turn aucta abscissa in Ad, mutabit ordinata directionem in dh , ac ex parte opposita augebitur
prius usque ad F, turn decrescet per il usque ad G, ubi evanescet, & iterum mutabit
directionem regressa in mn ad illam priorem, donee post evanescentiam, & directionis
mutationem factam in omnibus sectionibus I, L, N, P, R, fiant ordinatas op, vs, directionis
constantis, & decrescentes ad sensum in ratione reciproca duplicata abscissarum Ao, Av.
Quamobrem illud est manifestum, per ejusmodi curvam exprimi eas ipsas vires, initio

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

0

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

o

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 43

mately inversely proportional to the squares of the distances. This holds good as the
distances are increased indefinitely to any extent, or at any rate until we get to distances
that are far greater than all the distances of the planets & comets.

11. A law of this kind will seem at first sight to be very complicated, & to be the result The simplicity of

of combining together several different laws in a haphazard sort of way ; but it can be of the law can ^ re~
^.t. • i 1 i • j o v j • i v i • 1 i r presented by means

the simplest kind & not complicated in the slightest degree ; it can be represented for of a continuous
instance by a single continuous curve, or by an algebraical formula, as I intimated above. curve-
A curve of this sort is perfectly adapted to the .graphical representation of this sort of law,
& it does not require a knowledge of geometry to set it forth. It is sufficient for anyone
merely to glance at it, & in it, just as in a picture we are accustomed to view all manner of
things depicted, so will he perceive the nature of these forces. In a curve of this kind,
those lines, that geometricians call abscissae, namely, segments of the axis to which the
curve is referred, represent the distances of two points from one another ; & those, which
we called ordinates, namely, lines drawn perpendicular to the axis to meet the curve, repre-
sent forces. These, when they lie on one side of the axis represent attractive forces, and,
when they lie on the other side, repulsive forces ; & according as the curve approaches the
axis or recedes from it, they too are diminished or increased. When the curve cuts the
axis & passes from one side of it to the other, the direction of the ordinates being changed
in consequence, the forces pass from positive to negative or vice versa. When any arc of
the curve approaches ever more closely to some straight line perpendicular to the axis and
indefinitely produced, in such a manner that, even if this goes on beyond all limits, yet
the curve never quite reaches the line (such an arc is called asymptotic by geometricians),
then the forces themselves will increase indefinitely.

12. I set forth and explained a curve of this sort in my dissertations De Firibus vivis The form of the
(Art. 51), De Lumine (Art. 5), De lege virium in Natura existentium (Art. 68) ; and Father curve-
Benvenutus published the same thing in his Synopsis Physicce Generalis (Art. 108). This

will give you some idea of its nature in a few words.

In Fig. i the axis C'AC has at the point A a straight line AB perpendicular to itself,
which is an asymptote to the curve ; there are two branches of the curve, one on each side
of AB, which are equal & similar to one another in every way. Of these, one, namely
DEFGHIKLMNOPQRSTV, has first of all an asymptotic arc ED ; this indeed, if it is
produced ever so far in the direction ED, will approach nearer & nearer to the straight line
AB when it also is produced indefinitely, but will never reach it ; then, in the direction
DE, it will continually recede from this straight line, & so indeed will all the rest of the arcs
continually recede from this straight line towards V. The first arc continually approaches
the axis C'C, until it meets it in some point E ; then it cuts it at this point & passes on,
continually receding from the axis until it arrives at a certain distance given by the point
F ; after that the recession changes to an approach, & it cuts the axis once more in G ; &
so on, with successive changes of curvature, the curve winds about the axis, & at the same
time cuts it in a number of points that is really large, although only a very few of the
intersections of this kind, as I, L, N, P, R, are shown in the diagram. Finally the arc of the
curve ends up with the other branch TpsV, lying on the opposite side of the axis with
respect to the first branch ; and this second branch has the axis itself as its asymptote,
& approaches it approximately in such a manner that the distances from the axis are in
the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances from the straight line AB.

13. If from any point of the axis, such as a, b, or d, there is erected a straight line per- The abscissae re-
pendicular to it to meet the curve, such as ag, br, or db then the segment of the axis, Aa, £res^Jg

Ab, or Ad, is called the abscissa, & represents the distance of any two points of matter from forces,
one another ; the perpendicular, ag, br, or dh, is called the ordinate, & this represents the
force, which is repulsive or attractive, according as the ordinate lies with regard to the
axis on the side towards D, or on the opposite side.

14. Now it is clear that, in a curve of this form, the ordinate ag will be increased Change in the or-
beyond all bounds, if the abscissa Aa is in the same way diminished beyond all bounds ; & fbat tlfey reprSent!
if the latter is increased and becomes Ab, the ordinate will be diminished, & it will become

br, which will continually diminish as b approaches to E, at which point it will vanish.
Then the abscissa being increased until it becomes Ad, the ordinate will change its direction
as it becomes db, & will be increased in the opposite direction at first, until the point F is
reached, when it will be decreased through the value il until the point G is attained, at
which point it vanishes ; at the point G, the ordinate will once more change its direction
as it returns to the position mn on the same side of the axis as at the start. Finally, after
vanishing & changing direction at all points of intersection with the axis, such as I, L, N,
P, R, the ordinates take the several positions indicated by op, vs : here the direction remains
unchanged, & the ordinates decrease approximately in the inverse ratio of the squares of
the abscissae Ao, Av. Hence it is perfectly evident that, by a curve of this kind, we can

44

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Discrimen hu us
legis virium a
gravitate N e w-
toniana : ejus usus
in Physica : ordo
pertractandorum.

Occasio inveniendae
Theories ex consid-
eraticine impulsus.

V

repulsivas, & imminutis in infinitum distantiis auctas in infinitum, auctis imminutas, turn
evanescentes, abeuntes, mutata directione, in attractivas, ac iterum evenescentes, mutatasque
per vices : donee demum in satis magna distantia evadant attractive ad sensum in ratione
reciproca duplicata distantiarum.

15. Haec virium lex a Newtoniana gravitate differt in ductu, & progressu curvae earn
exprimentis quse nimirum, ut in fig. 2, apud Newtonum est hyperbola DV gradus tertii,
jacens tota citra axem, quern nuspiam

secat, jacentibus omni-[8]-bus ordinatis
vs, op, bt, ag ex parte attractiva, ut
idcirco nulla habeatur mutatio e positivo
ad negativum, ex attractione in repulsi-
onem, vel vice versa ; caeterum utraque
per ductum exponitur curvae continue
habentis duo crura infinita asymptotica
in ramis singulis utrinque in infinitum
productis. Ex hujusmodi autem virium
lege, & ex solis principiis Mechanicis
notissimis, nimirum quod ex pluribus
viribus, vel motibus componatur vis, vel
motus quidam ope parallelogrammorum,
quorum latera exprimant vires, vel mo-
tus componentes, & quod vires ejusmodi

in punctis singulis, tempusculis singulis aequalibus, inducant velocitates, vel motus proportion-
ales sibi, omnes mihi profluunt generales, & praecipuae quacque particulars proprietates cor-
porum,uti etiam superius innui, nee ad singulares proprietates derivandas in genere afHrmo, eas
haberi per diversam combinationem, sed combinationes ipsas evolvo, & geometrice demon-
stro, quae e quibus combinationibus phasnomena, & corporum species oriri debeant. Verum
antequam ea evolvo in parte secunda, & tertia, ostendam in hac prima, qua via, & quibus
positivis rationibus ad earn virium legem devenerim, & qua ratione illam elementorum
materiae simplicitatem eruerim, turn quas difHcultatem aliquam videantur habere posse,
dissolvam.

1 6. Cum anno 1745 De Viribus vivis dissertationem conscriberem, & omnia, quse a
viribus vivis repetunt, qui Leibnitianam tuentur sententiam, & vero etiam plerique ex iis,
qui per solam velocitatem vires vivas metiuntur, repeterem immediate a sola velocitate
genita per potentiarum vires, quae juxta communem omnium Mechanicorum sententiam
velocitates vel generant, vel utcunque inducunt proportionales sibi, & tempusculis, quibus
agunt, uti est gravitas, elasticitas, atque aliae vires ejusmodi ; ccepi aliquant: o diligentius
inquirere in earn productionem velocitatis, quae per impulsum censetur fieri, ubi tota
velocitas momento temporis produci creditur ab iis, qui idcirco percussionis vim infinities
majorem esse censent viribus omnibus, quae pressionem solam momentis singulis exercent.
Statim illud mihi sese obtulit, alias pro percussionibus ejusmodi, quee nimirum momento
temporis finitam velocitatem inducant, actionum leges haberi debere.

FIG

origo ejusdem ex 17. Verum re altius considerata, mihi illud incidit, si recta utamur ratiocinandi methodo,

susTmrnedUatTalin eum agendi modum submovendum esse a Natura, quae nimirum eandem ubique virium

lege Continuitatis. legem, ac eandem agendi rationem adhibeat : impulsum nimirum immediatum alterius

corporis in alterum, & immediatam percussionem haberi non posse sine ilia productione

finitse velocitatis facta momento temporis indivisibili, & hanc sine saltu quodam, & Isesione

illius, quam legem Continuitatis appellant, quam quidem legem in Natura existere, & quidem

satis [9] valida ratione evinci posse existimabam. En autem ratiocinationem ipsam, qua

turn quidem primo sum usus, ac deinde novis aliis, atque aliis meditationibus illustravi, ac

confirmavi.

minus velox.

Laesio legis Continu- 18. Concipiantur duo corpora aequalia, quae moveantur in directum versus eandem

cOTpus^efocruTim- plagam> & id, quod praecedit, habeat gradus velocitatis 6, id vero, quod ipsum persequitur
mediate incurrat in gradus 12. Si hoc posterius cum sua ilia velocitate illaesa deveniat ad immediatum contactum
cum illo priore ; oportebit utique, ut ipso momento temporis, quo ad contactum devenerint,
illud posterius minuat velocitatem suam, & illud primus suam augeat, utrumque per saltum,
abeunte hoc a 12 ad 9, illo a 6 ad 9, sine ullo transitu per intermedios gradus n, & 7 ; 10, &
8 ; 9^, & 8i, &c. Neque enim fieri potest, ut per aliquam utcunque exiguam continui

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 45

represent the forces in question, which are initially repulsive & increase indefinitely as the
distances are diminished indefinitely, but which, as the distances increase, are first of all
diminished, then vanish, then become changed in direction & so attractive, again vanish,
& change their direction, & so on alternately ; until at length, at a distance comparatively
great they finally become attractive & are sensibly proportional to the inverse squares of
the distance.

ic. This law of forces differs from the law of gravitation enunciated by Newton in Difference between

. J -nii r i i • i i • • this 'aw °f forces

the construction & development or the curve that represents it ; thus, the curve given in & Newton's law of
Fie. 2, which is that according to Newton, is DV, a hyperbola of the third degree, lying gravitation ; i t s

ii • i r i • i • i • i • nil'6 use ln Physics ;

altogether on one side of the axis, which it does not cut at any point ; all the ordmates, the order in which
such as vs, op, bt, ag lie on the side of the axis representing attractive forces, & there- ^ets^ects are to
fore there is no change from positive to negative, i.e., from attraction to repulsion, or
vice versa. On the other hand, each of the laws is represented by the construction of a
continuous curve possessing two infinite asymptotic branches in each of its members, if
produced to infinity on both sides. Now, from a law of forces of this kind, & with the
help of well-known mechanical principles only, such as that a force or motion can be com-
pounded from several forces or motions by the help of parallelograms whose sides represent
the component forces or motions, or that the forces of this kind, acting on single points
for single small equal intervals of time, produce in them velocities that are proportional to
themselves ; from these alone, I say, there have burst forth on me in a regular flood all
the general & some of the most important particular properties of bodies, as I intimated
above. Nor, indeed, for the purpose of deriving special properties, do I assert that they
ought to be obtained owing to some special combination of points ; on the contrary I
consider the combinations themselves, & prove geometrically what phenomena, or what
species of bodies, ought to arise from this or that combination. Of course, before I
come to consider, both in the second part and in the third, all the matters mentioned
above, I will show in this first part in what way, & by what direct reasoning, I have arrived
at this law of forces, & by what argument I have made out the simplicity of the elements
of matter ; then I will give an explanation of every point that may seem to present any
possible difficulty.

16. In the year 1745, I was putting together my dissertation De Firibus vivis, & had The occasion that
derived everything that they who adhere to the idea of Leibniz, & the greater number of o^my^L^Trom
those who measure ' living forces ' by means of velocity only, derive from these ' living the consideration
forces ' ; as, I say I had derived everything directly & solely from the velocity generated by of imPulsive action,
the forces of those influences, which, according to the generally accepted view taken by

all Mechanicians, either generate, or in some way induce, velocities that are proportional
to themselves & the intervals of time during which they act ; take, for instance, gravity,
elasticity, & other forces of the same kind. I then began to investigate somewhat more
carefully that production of velocity which is thought to arise through impulsive action,
in which the whole of the velocity is credited with being produced in an instant of time by
those, who think, because of that, that the force of percussion is infinitely greater than all
forces which merely exercise pressure for single instants. It immediately forced itself upon
me that, for percussions of this kind, which really induce a finite velocity in an instant of
time, laws for their actions must be obtained different from the rest.

17. However, when I considered the matter more thoroughly, it struck me that, if The cause of
we employ a straightforward method of argument, such a mode of action must be with- w^s the^pposftion
drawn from Nature, which in every case adheres to one & the same law of forces, & the raised to the Law
same mode of action. I came to the conclusion that really immediate impulsive action of °he idea'

one body on another, & immediate percussion, could not be obtained, without the pro- impulse,
duction of a finite velocity taking place in an indivisible instant of time, & this would have
to be accomplished without any sudden change or violation of what is called the Law of
Continuity ; this law indeed I considered as existing in Nature, & that this could be shown
to be so by a sufficiently valid argument. The following is the line of argument that I
employed initially ; afterwards I made it clearer & confirmed it by further arguments &
fresh reflection.

1 8. Suppose there are two equal bodies, moving in the same straight line & in the violation of the
same direction ; & let the one that is in front have a degree of velocity represented by ^ tod^movrng1
6, & the one behind a degree represented by 12. If the latter, i.e., the body that was be- more swiftly comes
hind, should ever reach with its velocity undiminished, & come into absolute contact with, J"*° with^another
the former body which was in front, then in every case it would be necessary that, at the body moving more
very instant of time at which this contact happened, the hindermost body should diminish slowlv-

its velocity, & the foremost body increase its velocity, in each case by a sudden change :
one of them would pass from 12 to 9, the other from 6 to 9, without any passage through
the intermediate degrees, n & 7, 10 & 8, 9$ & 8f, & so on. For it cannot possibly happen

46 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

temporis particulam ejusmodi mutatio fiat per intermedios gradus, durante contactu. Si
enim aliquando alterum corpus jam habuit 7 gradus velocitatis, & alterum adhuc retinet
1 1 ; toto illo tempusculo, quod effluxit ab initio contactus, quando velocitates erant 12, & 6,
ad id tempus, quo sunt n, & 7, corpus secundum debuit moveri cum velocitate majore,
quam primum, adeoque plus percurrere spatii, quam illud, £ proinde anterior ejus superficies
debuit transcurrere ultra illius posteriorem superficiem, & idcirco pars aliqua corporis
sequentis cum aliqua antecedentis corporis parte compenetrari debuit, quod cum ob
impenetrabilitatem, quam in materia agnoscunt passim omnes Physici, & quam ipsi tri-
buendam omnino esse, facile evincitur, fieri omnino non possit ; oportuit sane, in ipso
primo initio contactus, in ipso indivisibili momento temporis, quod inter tempus continuum
praecedens contactum, & subsequens, est indivisibilis limes, ut punctum apud Geometras
est limes indivisibilis inter duo continue lineae segmenta, mutatio velocitatum facta fuerit
per saltum sine transitu per intermedias, laesa penitus ilia continuitatis lege, quae itum ab
una magnitudine ad aliam sine transitu per intermedias omnino vetat. Quod autem in
corporibus aequalibus diximus de transitu immediato utriusque ad 9 gradus velocitatis,
recurrit utique in iisdem, vel in utcunque inaequalibus de quovis alio transitu ad numeros
quosvis. Nimirum ille posterioris corporis excessus graduum 6 momento temporis auferri
debet, sive imminuta velocitate in ipso, sive aucta in priore, vel in altero imminuta utcunque,
& aucta in altero, quod utique sine saltu, qui omissis infinitis intermediis velocitatibus
habeatur, obtineri omnino non poterit.

Objectio petita a ig. Sunt, qui difficultatem omnem submoveri posse censeant, dicendo, id quidem ita se

cofporum.dl ' habere debere, si corpora dura habeantur, quae nimirum nullam compressionem sentiant,
nullam mutationem figurae ; & quoniam hsec a multis excluduntur penitus a Natura ; dum
se duo globi contingunt, introcessione, [10] & compressione partium fieri posse, ut in ipsis
corporibus velocitas immutetur per omnes intermedios gradus transitu facto, & omnis
argumenti vis eludatur.

Ea uti non posse, 2O fa mprjmis ea responsione uti non possunt, quicunque cum Newtono, & vero etiam

qui admittunt ele- _, \ . . r . j • o

menta soiida, & cum plerisquc veterum Pnilosopnorum pnma elementa matenae omnino dura admittunt, &

dura- soiida, cum adhaesione infinita, & impossibilitate absoluta mutationis figurae. Nam in primis

elementis illis solidis, & duris, quae in anteriore adsunt sequentis corporis parte, & in praece-

dentis posteriore, quae nimirum se mutuo immediate contingunt, redit omnis argumenti vis

prorsus illaesa.

Extensionem con- 2i. Deinde vero illud omnino intelligi sane non potest, quo pacto corpora omnia partes

primoT pores,1™*! aliquas postremas circa superficiem non habeant penitus solidas, quae idcirco comprimi
parietes soiidos, ac ornnino non possint. In materia quidem, si continua sit, divisibilitas in infinitum haberi
potest, & vero etiam debet ; at actualis divisio in infinitum difficultates secum trahit sane
inextricablies ; qua tamen divisione in infinitum ii indigent, qui nullam in corporibus
admittunt particulam utcunque exiguam compressionis omnis expertem penitus, atque
incapacem. Ii enim debent admittere, particulam quamcunque actu interpositis poris
distinctam, divisamque in plures pororum ipsorum velut parietes, poris tamen ipsis iterum
distinctos. Illud sane intelligi non potest, qui fiat, ut, ubi e vacuo spatio transitur ad corpus,
non aliquis continuus haberi debeat alicujus in se determinatae crassitudinis paries usque ad
primum porum, poris utique carens ; vel quomodo, quod eodem recidit, nullus sit extimus,
& superficiei externae omnium proximus porus, qui nimirum si sit aliquis, parietem habeat
utique poris expertem, & compressionis incapacem, in quo omnis argumenti superioris vis
redit prorsus illaesa.

legis Con- 22. At ea etiam, utcunque penitus inintelligibili, sententia admissa, redit omnis eadem

iprimis su^r™ argument! vis in ipsa prima, & ultima corporum se immediate contingentium superficie, vel
debus, vel punctis. s{ nullae continuae superficies congruant, in lineis, vel punctis. Quidquid enim sit id, in quo
contactus fiat, debet utique esse aliquid, quod nimirum impenetrabilitati occasionem
praestet, & cogat motum in sequente corpore minui, in prascedente augeri ; id, quidquid est,
in quo exeritur impenetratibilitatis vis, quo fit immediatus contactus, id sane velocitatem
mutare debet per saltum, sine transitu per intermedia, & in eo continuitatis lex abrumpi

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 47

that this kind of change is made by intermediate stages in some finite part, however small,
of continuous time, whilst the bodies remain in contact. For if at any time the one
body then had 7 degrees of velocity, the other would still retain 1 1 degrees ; thus, during
the whole time that has passed since the beginning of contact, when the velocities were
respectively 12 Si 6, until the time at which they are 1 1 & 7, the second body must be moved
with a greater velocity than the first ; hence it must traverse a greater distance in space
than the other. It follows that the front surface of the second body must have passed
beyond the back surface of the first body ; & therefore some part of the body that follows
behind must be penetrated by some part of the body that goes in front. Now, on account
of impenetrability, which all Physicists in all quarters recognize in matter, & which can be
easily proved to be rightly attributed to it, this cannot possibly happen. There really
must be, in the commencement of contact, in that indivisible instant of time which is an
indivisible limit between the continuous time that preceded the contact & that subsequent
to it (just in the same way as a point in geometry is an indivisible limit between two seg-
ments of a continuous line), a change of velocity taking place suddenly, without any passage
through intermediate stages ; & this violates the Law of Continuity, which absolutely
denies the possibility of a passage from one magnitude to another without passing through
intermediate stages. Now what has been said in the case of equal bodies concerning the
direct passing of both to 9 degrees of velocity, in every case holds good for such equal bodies,
or for bodies that are unequal in any way, concerning any other passage to any numbers.
In fact, the excess of velocity in the hindmost body, amounting to 6 degrees, has to be got
rid of in an instant of time, whether by diminishing the velocity of this body, or by increasing
the velocity of the other, or by diminishing somehow the velocity of the one & increasing
that of the other ; & this cannot possibly be done in any case, without the sudden change
that is obtained by omitting the infinite number of intermediate velocities.

19. There are some people, who think that the whole difficulty can be removed by An objection de-
saying that this is just as it should be, if hard bodies, such as indeed experience no com- ^edexr^ncenyilo1
pression or alteration of shape, are dealt with ; whereas by many philosophers hard bodies hard bodies.

are altogether excluded from Nature ; & therefore, so long as two spheres touch one
another, it is possible, by introcession & compression of their parts, for it to happen that in
these bodies the velocity is changed, the passage being made through all intermediate stages ;
& thus the whole force of the argument will be evaded.

20. Now in the first place, this reply can not be used by anyone who, following New- This reP'y cannot
ton, & indeed many of the ancient philosophers as well, admit the primary elements of ^"admit^oiid0*
matter to be absolutely hard & solid, possessing infinite adhesion & a definite shape that it hard elements.

is perfectly impossible to alter. For the whole force of my argument then applies quite
unimpaired to those solid and hard primary elements that are in the anterior part of the
body that is behind, & in the hindmost part of the body that is in front ; & certainly these
parts touch one another immediately.

21. Next it is truly impossible to understand in the slightest degree how all bodies do Continuous exten-
not have some of their last parts just near to the surface perfectly solid, & on that account mary ^resT* walls
altogether incapable of being compressed. If matter is continuous, it may & must be sub- bounding them,
ject to infinite divisibility ; but actual division carried on indefinitely brings in its train

difficulties that are truly inextricable ; however, this infinite division is required by those
who do not admit that there are any particles, no matter how small, in bodies that are
perfectly free from, & incapable of, compression. For they must admit the idea that every
particle is marked off & divided up, by the action of interspersed pores, into many boundary
walls, so to speak, for these pores ; & these walls again are distinct from the pores them-
selves. It is quite impossible to understand why it comes about that, in passing from
empty vacuum to solid matter, we are not then bound to encounter some continuous wall of
some definite inherent thickness from the surface to the first pore, this wall being everywhere
devoid of pores ; nor why, which comes to the same thing in the end, there does not exist
a pore that is the last & nearest to the external surface ; this pore at least, if there were one,
certainly has a wall that is free from pores & incapable of compression ; & here then the
whole force of the argument used above applies perfectly unimpaired.

22. Moreover, even if this idea is admitted, although it may be quite unintelligible, Violation of the
then the whole force of the same argument applies to the first or last surface of the bodies ta^s'piace^any
that are in immediate contact with one another ; or, if there are no continuous surfaces rate, in prime sur-
congruent, then to the lines or points. For, whatever the manner may be in which contact

takes place, there must be something in every case that certainly affords occasion for
impenetrability, & causes the motion of the body that follows to be diminished, & that of
the one in front to be increased. This, whatever it may be, from which the force of impene-
trability is derived, at the instant at which immediate contact is obtained, must certainly
change the velocity suddenly, & without any passage through intermediate stages ; & by

48

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

debet, atque labefactari, si ad ipsum immediatum contactum illo velocitatum discrimine
deveniatur. Id vero est sane aliquid in quacunque e sententiis omnibus continuam
extensionem tribuentibus materise. Est nimirum realis affectio qusedam corporis, videlicet
ejus limes ultimus realis, superficies, realis superficiei limes linea, realis lineae limes punctum,
qua affectiones utcunque in iis sententiis sint prorsus inseparabiles [n] ab ipso corpore,
sunt tamen non utique intellectu confictae, sed reales, quas nimirum reales dimensiones
aliquas habent, ut superficies binas, linea unam, ac realem motum, & translationem cum ipso
corpore, cujus idcirco in iis sententiis debent, esse affectiones quaedam, vel modi.

Objectio petita a 27. Est, qui dicat, nullum in iis committi saltum idcirco, quod censendum sit, nullum

vucemassa, &,.J r . .. , ,, i\/r x

motns. quae super- habere motum, superficiem, Imeam, punctum, quae massam habeant nullam. Motus, mquit,

ficiebus, & punctis a Mechanicis habet pro mensura massam in velocitatem ductam : massa autem est super-
non convemant. _.. , . • • «• • i • j • • • • /-^

ficies baseos ducta in crassitudmem, sive altitudmem, ex. gr. m pnsmatis. Quo minor est
ejusmodi crassitude, eo minor est massa, & motus, ac ipsa crassitudine evanescente, evanescat
oportet & massa, & motus.

Kesponsionis ini- 24. Verum qui sic ratiocinatur, inprimis ludit in ipsis vocibus. Massam vulgo appellant

tacam.^punctmn! quantitatem materiae, & motum corporum metiuntur per massam ejusmodi, ac velocitatem.

posita extensione At quemadmodum in ipsa geometrica quantitate tria genera sunt quantitatum, corpus, vel

contmua, e - ^11^^ qUO(J trinam dimensionem habet, superficies quae binas, linae, quae unicam, quibus

accedit linese limes punctum, omni dimensione, & extensione carens ; sic etiam in Physica

habetur in communi corpus tribus extensionis speciebus praeditum ; superficies realis extimus

corporis limes, praedita binis ; linea, limes realis superficiei, habens unicam; & ejusdem

lineae indivisibilis limes punctum. Utrobique alterum alterius est limes, non pars, & quatuor

diversa genera constituunt. Superficies est nihil corporeum, sed non & nihil superficial,

quin immo partes habet, & augeri potest, & minui ; & eodem pacto linea in ratione quidem

superficiei est nihil, sed aliquid in ratione linese ; ac ipsum demum punctum est aliquid in

suo genere, licet in ratione lineae sit nihil.

QUO pacto nomen 25. Hinc autem in iis ipsis massa quaedam considerari potest duarum dimensionum, vel

motus 'debeat8 con- unius, vel etiam nullius continuae dimensionis, sed numeri punctorum tantummodo, uti

venire superficie- quantitas ejus genere designetur ; quod si pro iis etiam usurpetur nomen massae generaliter,

bus, imeis, punctis. motus quantitas definiri poterit per productum ex velocitate, & massa ; si vero massae nomen

tribuendum sit soli corpori, turn motus quidem corporis mensura erit massa in velocitatem

ducta ; superficiei, lineae, punctorum quotcunque motus pro mensura habebit quantitatem

superficiei, vel lineae, vel numerum punctorum in velocitatem ducta ; sed motus utique iis

omnibus speciebus tribuendus erit, eruntque quatuor motuum genera, ut quatuor sunt

quantitatum, solidi, superficiei, lineae, punctorum ; ac ut altera harum erit nihil in alterius

ratione, non in sua ; ita alterius motus erit nihil in ratione alterius sed erit sane aliquid in

ratione sui, non purum nihil.

Fore, ut ea laedatur
saltern in velocitate
punctorum.

Motum passim rI2i 2Q- gt quidem jpSj Mechanici vulgo motum tribuunt & superficiebus & lineis, &

tnbui punctis; ,'•..* , . '. -m • • j

fore, lit in eo ixda- punctis, ac centri gravitatis motum ubique nommant rhysici, quod centrum utique punctum
i^r Continuitatis est aliquod, non corpus trina praeditum dimensione, quam iste ad motus rationem, &
appellationem requirit, ludendo, ut ajebam, in verbis. Porro in ejusmodi motibus exti-
marum saltern superficierum, vel linearum, vel punctorum, saltus omnino committi debet,
si ea ad contactum immediatum deveniant cum illo velocitatum discrimine, & continuitatis
lex violari.

27. Verum hac omni disquisitione omissa de notione motus, & massae, si factum ex
velocitate, & massa, evanescente una e tribus dimensionibus, evanescit ; remanet utique
velocitas reliquarum dimensionum, quae remanet, si eae reapse remanent, uti quidem omnino
remanent in superficie, & ejus velocitatis mutatio haberi deberet per saltum, ac in ea violari
continuitatis lex jam toties memorata.

-, ti°exin?P<!ne- 28. Haec quidem ita evidentia sunt, ut omnino dubitari non possit, quin continuitatis

trabilitate admissa ,.,..,/ .-KT • » • • i « i • • j- • • j ••

in minimis parti- lex infnngi debeat, & saltus m Naturam induci, ubi cum velocitatis discrimine ad se invicem

cuiis. & ejus confu- accedant corpora, & ad immediatum contactum deveniant, si modo impenetrabilitas

corporibus tribuenda sit, uti revera est. Earn quidem non in integris tantummodo corpori-

bus, sed in minimis etiam quibusque corporum particulis, atque elementis agnoverunt

Physici universi. Fuit sane, qui post meam editam Theoriam, ut ipsam vim mei argument}

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

49

that the Law of Continuity must be broken & destroyed, if immediate contact is arrived
at with such a difference of velocity. Moreover, there is in truth always something of this
sort in every one of the ideas that attribute continuous extension to matter. There is some
real condition of the body, namely, its last real boundary, or its surface, a real boundary of
a surface, a line, & a real boundary of a line, a point ; & these conditions, however insepar-
able they may be in these theories from the body itself, are nevertheless certainly not
fictions of the brain, but real things, having indeed certain real dimensions (for instance, a
surface has two dimensions, & a line one) ; they also have real motion & movement of trans-
lation along with the body itself ; hence in these theories they must be certain conditions
or modes of it.

23. Someone may say that there is no sudden change made, because it must be con- Objection derived
sidered that a surface, a line or a point, having no mass, cannot have any motion. He may 1™™ mo/io^w^idi
say that motion has, according to Mechanicians, as its measure, the mass multiplied by the do not accord with
velocity ; also mass is the surface of the base multiplied by the thickness or the altitude, surfaces & P°mis-
as for instance in prisms. Hence the less the thickness, the less the mass & the motion ;

thus, if the thickness vanishes, then both the mass & therefore the motion must vanish
as well.

24. Now the man who reasons in this manner is first of all merely playing with words. Commencement of
Mass is commonly called quantity of matter, & the motion of bodies is measured by mass the answer to tl?ls :

. i • * • i « . , •*• —- . * , . c • -_* cl SUrlclCC, OF ii 11116,

of this kind & the velocity. But, just as in a geometrical quantity there are three kinds of or a point, is some-
quantities, namely, a body or a solid having three dimensions, a surface with two, & a line \
with one : to which is added the boundary of a line, a point, lacking dimensions altogether, is supposed to ex-
& of no extension. So also in Physics, a body is considered to be endowed with three lst'
species of extension ; a surface, the last real boundary of a body, to be endowed with two ;
a line, the real boundary of a surface, with one ; & the indivisible boundary of the line, to
be a point. In both subjects, the one is a boundary of the other, & not a part of it ; &
they form four different kinds. There is nothing solid about a surface ; but that does not
mean that there is also nothing superficial about it ; nay, it certainly has parts & can be
increased or diminished. In the same way a line is nothing indeed when compared with
a surface, but a definite something when compared with a line ; & lastly a point is a definite
something in its own class, although nothing in comparison with a line.

25. Hence also in these matters, a mass can be considered to be of two dimensions, or The manner in
of one, or even of no continuous dimension, but only numbers of points, just as quantity of wn'^ma^and^the
this kind is indicated. Now, if for these also, the term mass is employed in a generalized term motus is bound
sense, we shall be able to define the quantity of motion by the product of the velocity & !:°;^p^'to?ujfaces'

1 Ii • ' • 1 1 1 • • • 1 1 * 1 1 1 i HOPS, <X pOintS.

the mass. But if the term mass is only to be used in connection with a solid body, then
indeed the motion of a solid body will be measured by the mass multiplied by the velocity ;
but the motion of a surface, or a line, or any number of points will have as their measure
the quantity of the surface, or line, or the number- of the points, multiplied by the velocity.
Motion at any rate will be ascribed in all these cases, & there will be four kinds of motion,
as there are four kinds of quantity, namely, for a solid, a surface, a line, or for points ; and, as
each class of the latter will be as nothing compared with the class before it, but something
in its own class, so the motion of the one will be as nothing compared with the motion
of the other, but yet really something, & not entirely nothing, compared with those of
its own class.

26. Indeed, Mechanicians themselves commonly ascribe motion to surfaces, lines & Motion is ascribed
points, & Physicists universally speak of the motion of the centre of gravity ; this centre is minateiy3 the'i^w
undoubtedly some point, & not a body endowed with three dimensions, which the objector of Continuity is vio-
demands for the idea & name of motion, by playing with words, as I said above. On the '

other hand, in this kind of motions of ultimate surfaces, or lines, or points, a sudden change
must certainly be made, if they arrive at immediate contact with a difference of velocity
as above, & the Law of Continuity must be violated.

27. But, omitting all debate about the notions of motion & mass, if the product of it is at least a fact
the velocity & the mass vanishes when one of the three dimensions vanish, there will still fated^tf^the^idea
remain the velocity of the remaining dimensions ; & this will persist so long as the dimen- of the velocity of
sions persist, as they do persist undoubtedly in the case of a surface. Hence the change P°mts-

in its velocity must have been made suddenly, & thereby the Law of Continuity, which I
have already mentioned so many times, is violated.

28. These things are so evident that it is absolutely impossible to doubt that the Law objection derived

/./-!•••• r- i „ i j j i . . j j . »T iv from the admission

of Continuity is infringed, & that a sudden change is introduced into Nature, when bodies Of impenetrability
approach one another with a difference of velocity & come into immediate contact, if only in verv small Par-
we are to ascribe impenetrability to bodies, as we really should. And this property too, tion. '
not in whole bodies only, but in any of the smallest particles of bodies, & in the elements as
well, is recognized by Physicists universally. There was one, I must confess, who, after I

50

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

infringeret, affirmavit, minimas corporum particulas post contactum superficierum com-
penetrari non nihil, & post ipsam compenetrationem mutari velocitates per gradus. At id
ipsum facile demonstrari potest contrarium illi inductioni, & analogiae, quam unam habemus
in Physica investigandis generalibus naturae legibus idoneam, cujus inductionis vis quae sit,
& quibus in locis usum habeat, quorum locorum unus est hie ipse impenetrabilitatis ad
minimas quasque particulas extendendae, inferius exponam.

Objectio a voce

motus assumpta

pro mutatione;
confutatio ex
reahtate motus

2Q. Fuit itidem e Leibnitianorum familia, qui post evulgatam Theoriam meam cen-

. ' ,./>- •, • j- • j« j j -i •

suerit, dimcultatem ejusmodi amoveri posse dicendo, duas monades sibi etiam mvicem

occurrentes cum velocitatibus quibuscunque oppositis aequalibus, post ipsum contactum
..... . i, . . .' r .....

pergere moven sine locali progressione. Ham progressionem, ajebat, revera omnmo nihil
esse, si a spatio percurso sestimetur, cum spatium sit nihil ; motum utique perseverare, &
extingui per gradus, quia per gradus extinguatur energia ilia, qua in se mutuo agunt, sese
premendo invicem. Is itidem ludit in voce motus, quam adhibet pro mutatione quacunque,
& actione, vel actionis modo. Motus locaiis, & velocitas motus ipsius, sunt ea, quse ego
quidem adhibeo, & quae ibi abrumpuntur per saltum. Ea, ut evidentissime constat, erant
aliqua ante contactum, & post contactum mo-[i3]-mento temporis in eo casu abrumpuntur ;
nee vero sunt nihil ; licet spatium pure imaginarium sit nihil. Sunt realis affectio rei
mobilis fundata in ipsis modis localiter existendi, qui modi etiam relationes inducunt dis-
tantiarum reales utique. Quod duo corpora magis a se ipsis invicem distent, vel minus ;
quod localiter celerius moveantur, vel lentius ; est aliquid non imaginarie tantummodo, sed
realiter diversum ; in eo vero per immediatum contactum saltus utique induceretur in eo
casu, quo ego superius sum usus.

Qui Continuitatu, 30. Et sane summus nostri aevi Geometra, & Philosophus Mac-Laurinus, cum etiam ipse

jegem summover- conisjonem corporum contemplatus vidisset, nihil esse, quod continuitatis legem in collisione
corporum facta per immediatum contactum conservare, ac tueri posset, ipsam continuitatis
legem deferendam censuit, quam in eo casu omnino violari affirmavit in eo opere, quod de
Newtoni Compertis inscripsit, lib. I, cap. 4. Et sane sunt alii nonnulli, qui ipsam con-
tinuitatis legem nequaquam admiserint, quos inter Maupertuisius, vir celeberrimus, ac de
Republica Litteraria optime meritus, absurdam etiam censuit, & quodammodo inexplica-
bilem. Eodem nimirum in nostris de corporum collisione contemplationibus devenimus
Mac-Laurinus, & ego, ut viderimus in ipsa immediatum contactum, atque impulsionem cum
continuitatis lege conciliari non posse. At quoniam de impulsione, & immediate corporum
contactu ille ne dubitari quidem posse arbitrabatur, (nee vero scio, an alius quisquam omnem
omnium corporum immediatum contactum subducere sit ausus antea, utcunque aliqui aeris
velum, corporis nimirum alterius, in collisione intermedium retinuerint) continuitatis
legem deseruit, atque infregit.

Theorise exortus,
t^'t Uf fien

31. Ast ego cum ipsam continuitatis legem aliquanto diligentius considerarim, &
, quibus ea innititur, perpenderim, arbitratus sum, ipsam omnino e Natura
submoveri non posse, qua proinde retenta contactum ipsum immediatum submovendum
censui in collisionibus corporum, ac ea consectaria persecutus, quae ex ipsa continuitate
servata sponte profluebant, directa ratiocinatione delatus sum ad earn, quam superius
exposui, virium mutuarum legem, quae consectaria suo quaeque ordine proferam, ubi ipsa,
quae ad continuitatis legem retinendam argumenta me movent, attigero.

Lex Continuitatis 32. Continuitatis lex, de qua hie agimus, in eo sita est, uti superius innui, ut quaevis

quid sit : discn- • j i • i- T i- • • r

men inter status, quantitas, dum ab una magmtudme ad aliam migrat, debeat transire per omnes intermedias
& incrementa. ejusdem generis magnitudines. Solet etiam idem exprimi nominandi transitum per gradus
intermedios, quos quidem gradus Maupertuisius ita accepit, quasi vero quaedam exiguae
accessiones fierent momento temporis, in quo quidem is censuit violari jam necessario legem
ipsam, quae utcunque exiguo saltu utique violatur nihilo minus, quam maximo ; cum
nimi-[l4]-rum magnum, & parvum sint tantummodo respectiva ; & jure quidem id censuit ;
si nomine graduum incrementa magnitudinis cujuscunque momentanea intelligerentur.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 51

had published my Theory, endeavoured to overcome the force of the argument I had used
by asserting that the minute particles of the bodies after contact of the surfaces were
subject to compenetration in some measure, & that after compenetration the velocities
were changed gradually. But it can be easily proved that this is contrary to that induction
& analogy, such as we have in Physics, one peculiarly adapted for the investigation of the
general laws of Nature. What the power of this induction is, & where it can be used (one
of the cases is this very matter of extending impenetrability to the minute particles of a
body), I will set forth later.

29. There was also one of the followers of Leibniz who, after I had published my Objection to the
Theory, expressed his opinion that this kind of difficulty could be removed by saying that used for°a"change^
two monads colliding with one another with any velocities that were equal & opposite refutation from the

,,,., .. . .-I , , • TT reality of local mo-

would, alter they came into contact, go on moving without any local progression, rle tion.
added that that progression would indeed be absolutely nothing, if it were estimated by the
space passed over, since the space was nothing ; but the motion would go on & be destroyed
by degrees, because the energy with which they act upon one another, by mutual pressure,
would be gradually destroyed. He also is playing with the meaning of the term motus,
which he uses both for any change, & for action & mode of action. Local motion, & the
velocity of that motion are what I am dealing with, & these are here broken off suddenly.
These, it is perfectly evident, were something definite before contact, & after contact in
an instant of time in this case they are broken off. Not that they are nothing ; although
purely imaginary space is nothing. They are real conditions of the movable thing
depending on its modes of extension as regards position ; & these modes induce relations
between the distances that are certainly real. To account for the fact that two bodies
stand at a greater distance from one another, or at a less ; or for the fact that they are
moved in position more quickly, or more slowly ; to account for this there must be some-
thing that is not altogether imaginary, but real & diverse. In this something there would
be induced, in the question under consideration, a sudden change through immediate
contact.

30. Indeed the finest geometrician & philosopher of our times, Maclaurin, after he too There are some who
had considered the collision of solid bodies & observed that there is nothing which could i^doi continuity5
maintain & preserve the Law of Continuity in the collision of bodies accomplished by

immediate contact, thought that the Law of Continuity ought to be abandoned. He
asserted that, in general in the case of collision, the law was violated, publishing his idea in
the work that he wrote on the discoveries of Newton, bk. i, chap. 4. True, there are some
others too, who would not admit the Law of Continuity at all ; & amongst these, Mauper-
tuis, a man of great reputation & the highest merit in the world of letters, thought it was
senseless, & in a measure inexplicable. Thus, Maclaurin came to the same conclusion as
myself with regard to our investigations on the collision of bodies ; for we both saw that, in
collision, immediate contact & impulsive action could not be reconciled with the Law of
Continuity. But, whereas he came to the conclusion that there could be no doubt about
the fact of impulsive action & immediate contact between the bodies, he impeached &
abrogated the Law of Continuity. Nor indeed do I know of anyone else before me, who
has had the courage to deny the existence of all immediate contact for any bodies whatever,
although there are some who would retain a thin layer of air, (that is to say, of another body),
in between the two in collision.

31. But I, after considering the Law of Continuity somewhat more carefully, & The origin of my
pondering over the fundamental ideas on which it depends, came to the conclusion that this°Law, as'shouid
it certainly could not be withdrawn altogether out of Nature. Hence, since it had to be be done,
retained, I came to the conclusion that immediate contact in the collision of solid bodies

must be got rid of ; &, investigating the deductions that naturally sprang from the
conservation of continuity, I was led by straightforward reasoning to the law that I have set
forth above, namely, the law of mutual forces. These deductions, each set out in order,
I will bring forward when I come to touch upon those arguments that persuade me to
retain the Law of Continuity.

32. The Law of Continuity, as we here deal with it, consists in the idea that, as I Jhe nature of the

. j , ..''... . , , Law of Continuity ;

intimated above, any quantity, in passing from one magnitude to another, must pass through distinction between
all intermediate magnitudes of the same class. The same notion is also commonly expressed stat<~s & incre-

, , ° .,,. ,. -11 ments.

by saying that the passage is made by intermediate stages or steps ; these steps indeed
Maupertuis accepted, but considered that they were very small additions made in an
instant of time. In this he thought that the Law of Continuity was already of necessity
violated, the law being indeed violated by any sudden change, no matter how small, in no
less a degree than by a very great one. For, of a truth, large & small are only relative terms ;
& he rightly thought as he did, if by the name of steps we are to understand momentaneous

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Geometriae usus ad
earn exponendam :
momenta punctis,
tempera continua
lineis expressa.

Fluxus ordinatae
transeuntis per
m agnit u d i nes
omnes intermedias.

Idem in quantitate
variabili expressa :
aequivocatio in
voce gradus.

FKMH K' M' D'

FIG. 3.

Verum id ita intelligendum est ; ut singulis momentis singuli status respondeant ; incre-
menta, vel decrementa non nisi continuis tempusculis.

33. Id sane admodum facile concipitur ope Geometriae. Sit recta quaedam AB in
fig. 3, ad quam referatur quaedam alia linea CDE. Exprimat prior ex iis tempus, uti solet
utique in ipsis horologiis circularis peripheria

ab indicis cuspide denotata tempus definire.
Quemadmodum in Geometria in lineis
puncta sunt indivisibiles limites continuarum
lineas partium, non vero partes linese ipsius ;
ita in tempore distinguenda; erunt partes
continui temporis respondentes ipsis lines
partibus, continue itidem & ipsas, a mo-
mentis, quae sunt indivisibiles earum partium
limites, & punctis respondent ; nee inpos-
terum alio sensu agens de tempore momenti
nomen adhibebo, quam eo indivisibilis
limitis ; particulam vero temporis utcunque
exiguam, & habitam etiam pro infinitesima,
tempusculum appellabo.

34. Si jam a quovis puncto rectae AB, ut F, H, erigatur ordinata perpendicularis FG,
HI, usque ad lineam CD ; ea poterit repraesentare quantitatem quampiam continuo
variabilem. Cuicunque momento temporis F, H, respondebit sua ejus quantitatis magnitudo
FG, HI ; momentis autem intermediis aliis K, M, aliae magnitudines, KL, MN, respondebunt ;
ac si a puncto G ad I continua, & finita abeat pars linese CDE, facile patet & accurate de-
monstrari potest, utcunque eadem contorqueatur, nullum fore punctum K intermedium,
cui aliqua ordinata KL non respondeat ; & e converse nullam fore ordinatam magnitu-
dinis intermediae inter FG, HI, quae alicui puncto inter F, H intermedio non respondeat.

35. Quantitas ilia variabilis per hanc variabilem ordinatam expressa mutatur juxta
continuitatis legem, quia a magnitudine FG, quam habet momento temporis F, ad magni-
tudinem HI, quae respondet momento temporis H, transit per omnes intermedias magnitu-
dines KL, MN, respondentes intermediis momentis K, M, & momento cuivis respondet
determinata magnitudo. Quod si assumatur tempusculum quoddam continuum KM
utcunque exiguum ita, ut inter puncta L, N arcus ipse LN non mutet recessum a recta AB
in accessum ; ducta LO ipsi parallela, habebitur quantitas NO, quas in schemate exhibito
est incrementum magnitudinis ejus quantitatis continuo variatae. Quo minor est ibi
temporis particula KM, eo minus est id incrementum NO, & ilia evanescente, ubi congruant
momenta K, M, hoc etiam evanescit. Potest quaevis magnitudo KL, MN appellari status
quidam variabilis illius quantitatis, & gradus nomine deberet potius in-[i5]-telligi illud
incrementum NO, quanquam aliquando etiam ille status, ilia magnitudo KL nomine gradus
intelligi solet, ubi illud dicitur, quod ab una magnitudine ad aliam per omnes intermedios
gradus transeatur ; quod quidem aequivocationibus omnibus occasionem exhibuit.

status singuios 36. Sed omissis aequivocationibus ipsis, illud, quod ad rem facit, est accessio incremen-

menta^vero'utcun" torum facta non momento temporis, sed tempusculo continuo, quod est particula continui

que parva tem- temporis. Utcunque exiguum sit incrementum ON, ipsi semper respondet tempusculum

respondereC°ntinuis q.u°ddam KM continuum. Nullum est in linea punctum M ita proximum puncto K, ut sit

primum post ipsum ; sed vel congruunt, vel intercipiunt lineolam continua bisectione per

alia intermedia puncta perpetuo divisibilem in infinitum. Eodem pacto nullum est in

tempore momentum ita proximum alteri praecedenti momento, ut sit primum post ipsum,

sed vel idem momentum sunt, vel inter jacet inter ipsa tempusculum continuum per alia

intermedia momenta divisibile in infinitum ; ac nullus itidem est quantitatis continuo

variabilis status ita proximus praecedenti statui, ut sit primus post ipsum accessu aliquo

momentaneo facto : sed differentia, quae inter ejusmodi status est, debetur intermedio

continuo tempusculo ; ac data lege variationis, sive natura lineae ipsam exprimentis, &

quacunque utcunque exigua accessione, inveniri potest tempusculum continuum, quo ea

accessio advenerit.

Transitus sine sal- 37- Atque sic quidem intelligitur, quo pacto fieri possit transitus per intermedias

tu, etiamapositivis magnitudines omnes, per intermedios status, per gradus intermedios, quin ullus habeatur

ad negativa perm- ,° . r -, . ... , ' "

hiium, quod tamen saltus utcunque exiguus momento temporis factus. Notari mud potest tantummodo,
m°" eSstedVereu'ida1m mutati°nem neri alicubi per incrementa, ut ubi KL abit, in MN per NO ; alicubi per
reaiis status,1"0 ' decrementa, ut ubi K'L' abeat in N'M' per O'N' ; quin immo si linea CDE, quse legem

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 53

increments of any magnitude whatever. But the idea should be interpreted as follows :
single states correspond to single instants of time, but increments or decrements only to
small intervals of continuous time.

33. The idea can be very easily assimilated by the help of geometry. Explanation by the
Let AB be any straight line (Fig. 3), to which as axis let any other line CDE be referred. "nsseta°tfs ^eTes^

Let the first of them represent the time, in the same manner as it is customary to specify ted by points, con-
the time in the case of circular clocks by marking off the periphery with the end of a pointer. 1™°^ "^s*** °f
Now, just as in geometry, points are the indivisible boundaries of the continuous parts of
a line, so, in time, distinction must be made between parts of continuous time, which cor-
respond to these parts of a line, themselves also continuous, & instants of time, which are
the indivisible boundaries of those parts of time, & correspond to points. In future I shall
not use the term instant in any other sense, when dealing with time, than that of the
indivisible boundary ; & a small part of time, no matter how small, even though it is
considered to be infinitesimal, I shall term a tempuscule, or small interval of time.

34. If now from any points F,H on the straight line AB there are erected at right angles T.he flux °.f the or~
to it ordinates FG, HI, to meet the line CD ; any of these ordinates can be taken to repre- through^ ail *interS
sent a quantity that is continuously varying. To any instant of time F, or H, there will mediate values,
correspond its own magnitude of the quantity FG, or HI ; & to other intermediate instants

K, M, other magnitudes KL, MN will correspond. Now, if from the point G, there pro-
ceeds a continuous & finite part of the line CDE, it is very evident, & it can be rigorously
proved, that, no matter how the curve twists & turns, there is no intermediate point K,
to which some ordinate KL does not correspond ; &, conversely, there is no ordinate of
magnitude intermediate between FG & HI, to which there does not correspond a point
intermediate between F & H.

35. The variable quantity that is represented by this variable ordinate is altered in The same holds
accordance with the Law of Continuity ; for, from the magnitude FG, which it has at able1 quantity w
the instant of time F, to the magnitude HI, which corresponds to the instant H, it passes represented ; equi-
through all intermediate magnitudes KL, MN, which correspond to the intermediate oUhe1(term Itep^
instants K, M ; & to every instant there corresponds a definite magnitude. But if we take

a definite small interval of continuous time KM, no matter how small, so that between the
points L & N the arc LN does not alter from recession from the line AB to approach, &
draw LO parallel to AB, we shall obtain the quantity NO that in the figure as drawn is the
increment of the magnitude of the continuously varying quantity. Now the smaller the
interval of time KM, the smaller is this increment NO ; & as that vanishes when the
instants of time K, M coincide, the increment NO also vanishes. Any magnitude KL, MN
can be called a state of the variable quantity, & by the name step we ought rather to under-
stand the increment NO ; although sometimes also the state, or the magnitude KL is
accustomed to be called by the name step. For instance, when it is said that from one
magnitude to another there is a passage through all intermediate stages or steps ; but this
indeed affords opportunity for equivocations of all sorts.

36. But, omitting all equivocation of this kind, the point is this : that addition of single states cor-

.' 1-11 • • <• • i • 11 . respond to instants,

increments is accomplished, not m an instant 01 time, but in a small interval of con- but increments
tinuous time, which is a part of continuous time. However small the increment ON may however sma11 to

i i i Tru if mi •»•> intervals of con-

DC, there always corresponds to it some continuous interval KM. 1 here is no point M tinuous time.

in the straight line AB so very close to the point K, that it is the next after it ; but either
the points coincide, or they intercept between them a short length of line that is divisible
again & again indefinitely by repeated bisection at other points that are in between M &
K. In the same way, there is no instant of time that is so near to another instant that has
gone before it, that it is the next after it ; but either they are the same instant, or there
lies between them a continuous interval that can be divided indefinitely at other inter-
mediate instants. Similarly, there is no state of a continuously varying quantity so very
near to a preceding state that it is the next state to it, some momentary addition having
been made ; any difference that exists between two states of the same kind is due to a
continuous interval of time that has passed in the meanwhile. Hence, being given the
law of variation, or the nature of the line that represents it, & any increment, no matter
how small, it is possible to find a small interval of continuous time in which the increment
took place.

37. In this manner we can understand how it is possible for a passage to take place Passages without
through all intermediate magnitudes, through intermediate states, or through intermediate from^positive1 8 to
stages, without any sudden change being made, no matter how small, in an instant of time, negative through

T' 11 1111 • i 111- /i zero : zero how-

It can merely be remarked that change in some places takes place by increments (as when ever ;s not realiy

KL becomes MN by the addition of NO), in other places by decrements (as when K'L' nothing, but acer-

' tain real state.

54 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

variationis exhibit, alicubi secet rectam, temporis AB, potest ibidem evanescere magnitude,
ut ordinata M'N', puncto M' allapso ad D evanesceret, & deinde mutari in negativam PQ,
RS, habentem videlicet directionem contrariam, quae, quo magis ex oppositae parte crescit,
eo minor censetur in ratione priore, quemadmodum in ratione possessionis, vel divitiarum,
pergit perpetuo se habere pejus, qui iis omnibus, quae habebat, absumptis, aes alienum
contrahit perpetuo majus. Et in Geometria quidem habetur a positivo ad negativa
transitus, uti etiam in Algebraicis formulis, tarn transeundo per nihilum, quam per innnitum,
quos ego transitus persecutus sum partim in dissertatione adjecta meis Sectionibus Conicis,
partim in Algebra § 14, & utrumque simul in dissertatione De Lege Continuitatis ; sed in
Physica, ubi nulla quantitas in innnitum excrescit, is casus locum non habet, & non, nisi
transeundo per nihilum, transitus fit a positi-[i6]-vis ad negativa, ac vice versa ; quanquam,
uti inferius innuam, id ipsum sit non nihilum revera in se ipso, sed realis quidem status, &
habeatur pro nihilo in consideration quadam tantummodo, in qua negativa etiam, qui sunt
veri status, in se positivi, ut ut ad priorem seriem pertinentes negative quodam modo,
negativa appellentur.

Proponitur pro- ,§_ Exposita hoc pacto, & vindicata continuitatis lege, earn in Natura existere plerique

banda existentia _, ., J . . r . . .... ... P . . ,-, r.

legis Continuitat.s. Philosophi arbitrantur, contradicentibus nonnullis, uti supra mnui. Ego, cum in earn
primo inquirerem, censui, eandem omitti omnino non posse ; si earn, quam habemus unicam,
Naturae analogiam, & inductionis vim consulamus, ope cujus inductionis earn demonstrare
conatus sum in pluribus e memoratis dissertationibus, ac eandem probationem adhibet
Benvenutus in sua Synopsi Num. 119; in quibus etiam locis, prout diversis occasionibus
conscripta sunt, repetuntur non nulla.

Ejus probatio ab ,g Longum hie esset singula inde excerpere in ordinem redacta : satis erit exscribere

mductione satis ,. Jy . °_ , ~ . P . r ,-, -n • i • • j

ampia. dissertatioms De lege Continuitatis numerum 138. Post mductionem petitam praecedente

numero a Geometria, quae nullum uspiam habet saltum, atque a motu locali, in quo nunquam
ab uno loco ad alium devenitur, nisi ductu continue aliquo, unde consequitur illud, dis-
tantiam a dato loco nunquam mutari in aliam, neque densitatem, quae utique a distantiis
pendet particularum in aliam, nisi transeundo per intermedias ; fit gradus in eo numero ad
motuum velocitates, & ductus, quas magis hie ad rem faciunt, nimirum ubi de velocitate
agimus non mutanda per saltum in corporum collisionibus. Sic autem habetur : " Quin
immo in motibus ipsis continuitas servatur etiam in eo, quod motus omnes in lineis continuis
fiunt nusquam abruptis. Plurimos ejusmodi motus videmus. Planetae, & cometse in lineis
continuis cursum peragunt suum, & omnes retrogradationes fiunt paullatim, ac in stationibus
semper exiguus quidem motus, sed tamen habetur semper, atque hinc etiam dies paullatim
per auroram venit, per vespertinum crepusculum abit, Solis diameter non per saltum, sed
continuo motu supra horizontem ascendit, vel descendit. Gravia itidem oblique projecta
in lineis itidem pariter continuis motus exercent suos, nimirum in parabolis, seclusa ^aeris
resistentia, vel, ea considerata, in orbibus ad hyperbolas potius accedentibus, & quidem
semper cum aliqua exigua obliquitate projiciuntur, cum infinities infinitam improbabilitatem
habeat motus accurate verticalis inter infinities infinitas inclinationes, licet exiguas, & sub
sensum non cadentes, fortuito obvenienfe, qui quidem motus in hypothesi Telluris^motae a
parabolicis plurimum distant, & curvam continuam exhibent etiam pro casu projectionis
accurate verticalis, quo, quiescente penitus Tellure, & nulla ventorum vi deflectente motum,
haberetur [17] ascensus rectilineus, vel descensus. Immo omnes alii motus a gravitate
pendentes, omnes ab elasticitate, a vi magnetica, continuitatem itidem servant ; cum earn
servent vires illse ipsae, quibus gignuntur. Nam gravitas, cum decrescat in ratione reciproca
duplicata distantiarum, & distantise per saltum mutari non possint, mutatur per omnes
intermedias magnitudines. Videmus pariter, vim magneticam a distantiis pendere lege
continua ; vim elasticam ab inflexione, uti in laminis, vel a distantia, ut in particulis aeris
compressi. In iis, & omnibus ejusmodi viribus, & motibus, quos gignunt, continuitas habetur
semper, tarn in lineis quae describuntur, quam in velocitatibus, quae pariter per omnes
intermedias magnitudines mutantur, ut videre est in pendulis, in ascensu corporum gravium,

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 55

becomes N'M' by the subtraction of O'N') ; moreover, if the line CDE, which represents
the law of variation, cuts the straight AB, which is the axis of time, in any point, then the
magnitude can vanish at that point (just as the ordinate M'N' would vanish when the
point M' coincided with D), & be changed into a negative magnitude PQ, or RS, that is
to say one having an opposite direction ; & this, the more it increases in the opposite sense,
the less it is to be considered in the former sense (just as in the idea of property or riches,
a man goes on continuously getting worse off, when, after everything he had has been
taken away from him, he continues to get deeper & deeper into debt). In Geometry too
we have this passage from positive to negative, & also in algebraical formulae, the passage
being made not only through nothing, but also through infinity ; such I have discussed,
the one in a dissertation added to my Conic Sections, the other in my Algebra (§ 14), & both
of them together in my essay De Lege Continuitatis ; but in Physics, where no quantity
ever increases to an infinite extent, the second case has no place ; hence, unless the passage
is made through the value nothing, there is no passage from positive to negative, or vice
versa. Although, as I point out below, this nothing is not really nothing in itself, but a
certain real state ; & it may be considered as nothing only in a certain sense. In the same
sense, too, negatives, which are true states, are positive in themselves, although, as they
belong to the first set in a certain negative way, they are called negative.

38. Thus explained & defended, the Law of Continuity is considered by most philoso- I propose to prove
phers to exist in Nature, though there are some who deny it, as I mentioned above. I, LaVof^Continuity6
when first I investigated the matter, considered that it was absolutely impossible that it
should be left out of account, if we have regard to the unparalleled analogy that there is
with Nature & to the power of induction ; & by the help of this induction I endeavoured
to prove the law in several of the dissertations that I have mentioned, & Benvenutus also
used the same form of proof in his Synopsis (Art. 119). In these too, as they were written
on several different occasions, there are some repetitions.

39. It would take too long to extract & arrange in order here each of the passages in Proof by induction
these essays ; it will be sufficient if I give Art. 138 of the dissertation De Lege Continuitatis. s~^^ for the
After induction derived in the preceding article from geometry, in which there is no sudden
change anywhere, & from local motion, in which passage from one position to another
never takes place unless by some continuous progress (the consequence of which is that a
distance from any given position can never be changed into another distance, nor the
density, which depends altogether on the distances between the particles, into another density,
except by passing through intermediate stages), the step is made in that article to the
velocities of motions, & deductions, which have more to do with the matter now in hand,
namely, where we are dealing with the idea that the velocity is not changed suddenly in the
collision of solid bodies. These are the words : " Moreover in motions themselves
continuity is preserved also in the fact that all motions take place in continuous lines that
are not broken anywhere. We see a great number of motions of this kind. The planets &
the comets pursue their courses, each in its own continuous line, & all retrogradations are
gradual ; & in stationary positions the motion is always slight indeed, but yet there is
always some ; hence also daylight comes gradually through the dawn, & goes through the
evening twilight, as the diameter of the sun ascends above the horizon, not suddenly, but
by a continuous motion, & in the same manner descends. Again heavy bodies projected
obliquely follow their courses in lines also that are just as continuous ; namely, in para-
bolae, if we neglect the resistance of the air, but if that is taken into account, then in orbits
that are more nearly hyperbolae. Now, they are always projected with some slight obli-
quity, since there is an infinitely infinite probability against accurate vertical motion, from
out of the infinitely infinite number of inclinations (although slight & not capable of being
observed), happening fortuitously. These motions are indeed very far from being para-
bolae, if the hypothesis that the Earth is in motion is adopted. They give a continuous
curve also for the case of accurate vertical projection, in which, if the Earth were at rest,
& no wind-force deflected the motion, rectilinear ascent & descent would be obtained.
All other motions that depend on gravity, all that depend upon elasticity, or magnetic
force, also preserve continuity ; for the forces themselves, from which the motions arise,
preserve it. For gravity, since it diminishes in the inverse ratio of the squares of the dis-
tances, & the distances cannot be changed suddenly, is itself changed through every inter-
mediate stage. Similarly we see that magnetic force depends on the distances according
to a continuous law ; that elastic force depends on the amount of bending as in plates, or
according to distance as in particles of compressed air. In these, & all other forces of the
sort, & in the motions that arise from them, we always get continuity, both as regards the
lines which they describe & also in the velocities which are changed in similar manner
through all intermediate magnitudes ; as is seen in pendulums, in the ascent of heavy

56 PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

& in aliis mille ejusmodi, in quibus mutationes velocitatis fiunt gradatim, nee retro cursus
reflectitur, nisi imminuta velocitate per omnes gradus. Ea diligentissime continuitatem
servat omnia. Hinc nee ulli in naturalibus motibus habentur anguli, sed semper mutatio
directionis fit paullatim, nee vero anguli exacti habentur in corporibus ipsis, in quibus
utcunque videatur tennis acies, vel cuspis, microscopii saltern ope videri solet curvatura,
quam etiam habent alvei fluviorum semper, habent arborum folia, & frondes, ac rami, habent
lapides quicunque, nisi forte alicubi cuspides continuae occurrant, vel primi generis, quas
Natura videtur affectare in spinis, vel secundi generis, quas videtur affectare in avium
unguibus, & rostro, in quibus tamen manente in ipsa cuspide unica tangente continuitatem
servari videbimus infra. Infinitum esset singula persequi, in quibus continuitas in Natura
observatur. Satius est generaliter provocare ad exhibendum casum in Natura, in quo
eontinuitas non servetur, qui omnino exhiberi non poterit."

Duplex inductionis 40. Inductio amplissima turn ex hisce motibus, ac velocitatibus, turn ex aliis pluribus

vimhabeatittductio exemPn's> <lU3e habemus in Natura, in quibus ea ubique, quantum observando licet depre-
incompieta. hendere, continuitatem vel observat accurate, vel affcctat, debet omnino id efficere, ut ab

ea ne in ipsa quidem corporum collisione recedamus. Sed de inductionis natura, & vi, ac
ejusdem usu in Physica, libet itidem hie inserere partem numeri 134, & totum 135, disserta-
tionis De Lege Continuitatis. Sic autem habent ibidem : " Inprimis ubi generales Naturae
leges investigantur, inductio vim habet maximam, & ad earum inventionem vix alia ulla
superest via. Ejus ope extensionem, figurabilitem, mobilitatem, impenetrabilitatem
corporibus omnibus tribuerunt semper Philosophi etiam veteres, quibus eodem argumento
inertiam, & generalem gravitatem plerique e recentioribus addunt. Inductio, ut demon-
strationis vim habeat, debet omnes singulares casus, quicunque haberi possunt percurrere.
Ea in Natu-[i8]-rae legibus stabiliendis locum habere non potest. Habet locum laxior
qusedam inductio, quae, ut adhiberi possit, debet esse ejusmodi, ut inprimis in omnibus iis
casibus, qui ad trutinam ita revocari possunt, ut deprehendi debeat, an ea lex observetur,
eadem in iis omnibus inveniatur, & ii non exiguo numero sint ; in reliquis vero, si quse prima
fronte contraria videantur, re accuratius perspecta, cum ilia lege possint omnia conciliari ;
licet, an eo potissimum pacto concilientur, immediate innotescere, nequaquam possit. Si
eae conditiones habeantur ; inductio ad legem stabiliendam censeri debet idonea. Sic quia
videmus corpora tarn multa, quae habemus prae manibus, aliis corporibus resistere, ne in
eorum locum adveniant, & loco cedere, si resistendo sint imparia, potius, quam eodem
perstare simul ; impenetrabilitatem corporum admittimus ; nee obest, quod qusedam
corpora videamus intra alia, licet durissima, insinuari, ut oleum in marmora, lumen in
crystalla, & gemmas. Videmus enim hoc phsenomenum facile conciliari cum ipsa impene-
trabilitate, dicendo, per vacuos corporum poros ea corpora permeare. (Num. 135).
Praeterea, qusecunque proprietates absolutae, nimirum quae relationem non habent ad
nostros sensus, deteguntur generaliter in massis sensibilibus corporum, easdem ad quascunque
utcunque exiguas particulas debemus transferre ; nisi positiva aliqua ratio obstet, & nisi sint
ejusmodi, quae pendeant a ratione totius, seu multitudinis, contradistincta a ratione partis.
Primum evincitur ex eo, quod magna, & parva sunt respectiva, ac insensibilia dicuntur ea,
quse respectu nostrae molis, & nostrorum sensuum sunt exigua. Quare ubi agitur de
proprietatibus absolutis non respectivis, quaecunque communia videmus in iis, quse intra
limites continentur nobis sensibiles, ea debemus censere communia etiam infra eos limites :
nam ii limites respectu rerum, ut sunt in se, sunt accidentales, adeoque siqua fuisset analogise
Isesio, poterat ilia multo facilius cadere intra limites nobis sensibiles, qui tanto laxiores sunt,
quam infra eos, adeo nimirum propinquos nihilo. Quod nulla ceciderit, indicio est, nullam
esse. Id indicium non est evidens, sed ad investigationis principia pertinet, quae si juxta

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 57

bodies, & in a thousand other things of the same kind, where the changes of velocity occur
gradually, & the path is not retraced before the velocity has been diminished through all
degrees. All these things most strictly preserve continuity. Hence it follows that no
sharp angles are met with in natural motions, but in every case a change of direction occurs
gradually ; neither do perfect angles occur in bodies themselves, for, however fine an edge
or point in them may seem, one can usually detect curvature by the help of the microscope
if nothing else. We have this gradual change of direction also in the beds of rivers, in the
leaves, boughs & branches of trees, & stones of all kinds ; unless, in some cases perchance,
there may be continuous pointed ends, either of the first kind, which Nature is seen to
affect in thorns, or of the second kind, which she is seen to do in the claws & the beak of
birds ; in these, however, we shall see below that continuity is still preserved, since we are
left with a single tangent at the extreme end. It would take far too long to mention every
single thing in which Nature preserves the Law of Continuity ; it is more than sufficient
to make a general statement challenging the production of a single case in Nature, in which
continuity is not preserved ; for it is absolutely impossible for any such case to be brought
forward."

40. The effect of the very complete induction from such motions as these & velocities, induction of a two-
as well as from a large number of other examples, such as we have in Nature, where Nature *old , kil\d '• when

e c ,...-..& why incomplete

in every case, as far as can be gathered from direct observation, maintains continuity or induction has vaii-

tries to do so, should certainly be that of keeping us from neglecting it even in the case

of collision of bodies. As regards the nature & validity of induction, & its use in Physics,

I may here quote part of Art. 134 & the wjiole of Art. 135 from my dissertation De Lege

Continuitatis, The passage runs thus : " Especially when we investigate the general laws

of Nature, induction has very great power ; & there is scarcely any other method beside

it for the discovery of these laws. By its assistance, even the ancient philosophers attributed

to all bodies extension, figurability, mobility, & impenetrability ; & to these properties,

by the use of the same method of reasoning, most of the later philosophers add inertia &

universal gravitation. Now, induction should take account of every single case that can

possibly happen, before it can have the force of demonstration ; such induction as this has no

place in establishing the laws of Nature. But use is made of an induction of a less rigorous

type ; in order that this kind of induction may be employed, it must be of such a nature

that in all those cases particularly, which can be examined in a manner that is bound to

lead to a definite conclusion as to whether or no the law in question is followed, in all of

them the same result is arrived at ; & that these cases are not merely a few. Moreover,

in the other cases, if those which at first sight appeared to be contradictory, on further &

more accurate investigation, can all of them be made to agree with the law ; although,

whether they can be made to agree in this way better than in any other whatever, it is

impossible to know directly anyhow. If such conditions obtain, then it must be considered

that the induction is adapted to establishing the law. Thus, as we see that so many of

the bodies around us try to prevent other bodies from occupying the position which they

themselves occupy, or give way to them if they are not capable of resisting them, rather

than that both should occupy the same place at the same time, therefore we admit the

impenetrability of bodies. Nor is there anything against the idea in the fact that we see

certain bodies penetrating into the innermost parts of others, although the latter are very

hard bodies ; such as oil into marble, & light into crystals & gems. For we see that this

phenomenon can very easily be reconciled with the idea of impenetrability, by supposing

that the former bodies enter and pass through empty pores in the latter bodies (Art.

135). In addition, whatever absolute properties, for instance those that bear no relation

to our senses, are generally found to exist in sensible masses of bodies, we are bound to

attribute these same properties also to all small parts whatsoever, no matter how small

they may be. That is to say, unless some positive reason prevents this ; such as that they

are of such a nature that they depend on argument having to do with a body as a whole,

or with a group of particles, in contradistinction to an argument dealing with a part only.

The proof comes in the first place from the fact that great & small are relative terms, &

those things are called insensible which are very small with respect to our own size & with

regard to our senses. Therefore, when we consider absolute, & not relative, properties,

whatever we perceive to be common to those contained within the limits that are sensible

to us, we should consider these things to be still common to those beyond those limits.

For these limits, with regard to such matters as are self-contained, are accidental ; & thus,

if there should be any violation of the analogy, this would be far more likely to happen

between the limits sensible to us, which are more open, than beyond them, where indeed

they are so nearly nothing. Because then none did happen thus, it is a sign that there is

none. This sign is not evident, but belongs to the principles of investigation, which

generally proves successful if it is carried out in accordance with certain definite wisely

5 8 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

quasdam prudentes regulas fiat, successum habere solet. Cum id indicium fallere possit ;
fieri potest, ut committatur error, sed contra ipsum errorem habebitur praesumptio, ut
etiam in jure appellant, donee positiva ratione evincatur oppositum. Hinc addendum fuit,
nisi ratio positiva obstet. Sic contra hasce regulas peccaret, qui diceret, corpora quidem
magna compenetrari, ac replicari, & inertia carere non posse, compenetrari tamen posse, vel
replicari, vel sine inertia esse exiguas eorum partes. At si proprietas sit respectiva, respectu
nostrorum sensuum, ex [19] eo, quod habeatur in majoribus massis, non debemus inferre,
earn haberi in particulis minoribus, ut est hoc ipsum, esse sensibile, ut est, esse coloratas,
quod ipsis majoribus massis competit, minoribus non competit ; cum ejusmodi magnitudinis
discrimen, accidentale respectu materiae, non sit accidentale respectu ejus denominationis
sensibile, coloratum. Sic etiam siqua proprietas ita pendet a ratione aggregati, vel totius, ut
ab ea separari non possit ; nee ea, ob rationem nimirum eandem, a toto, vel aggregate debet
transferri ad partes. Est de ratione totius, ut partes habeat, nee totum sine partibus haberi
potest. Est de ratione figurabilis, & extensi, ut habeat aliquid, quod ab alio distet, adeoque,
ut habeat partes ; hinc eae proprietates, licet in quovis aggregate particularum materiae,
sive in quavis sensibili massa, inveniantur, non debent inductionis vi transferri ad particulas
quascunque."

Et impenetrabili- 41. Ex his patet, & impenetrabilitatem, & continuitatis legem per ejusmodi inductionis

ultatem tvtad""pCT genus abunde probari, atque evinci, & illam quidem ad quascunque utcunque exiguas

inductionem : "* ad particulas corporum, hanc ad gradus utcunque exiguos momento temporis adjectos debere

ipsam quid requu-a- exten(jj< Requiritur autem ad hujusmodi inductionem primo, ut ilia proprietas, ad quam

probandam ea adhibetur, in plurimis casibus observetur, aliter enim probabilitas esset exigua ;

& ut nullus sit casus observatus, in quo evinci possit, earn violari. Non est necessarium illud,

ut in iis casibus, in quibus primo aspectu timeri possit defectus proprietatis ipsius, positive

demonstretur, earn non deficere ; satis est, si pro iis casibus haberi possit ratio aliqua

conciliandi observationem cum ipsa proprietate, & id multo magis, si in aliis casibus habeatur

ejus conciliationis exemplum, & positive ostendi possit, eo ipso modo fieri aliquando

conciliationem.

Ejus appiicatio ad 42. Id ipsum fit, ubi per inductionem impenetrabilitas corporum accipitur pro generali

impenetrab;htatem. jege ]sjaturaEi Nam impenetrabilitatem ipsam magnorum corporum observamus in exemplis
sane innumeris tot corporum, quae pertractamus. Habentur quidem & casus, in quibus earn
violari quis credent, ut ubi oleum per ligna, & marmora penetrat, atque insinuatur, & ubi
lux per vitra, & gemmas traducitur. At praesto est conciliatio phasnomeni cum impenetra-
bilitate, petita ab eo, quod ilia corpora, in quse se ejusmodi substantiae insinuant, poros
habeant, quos 633 permeent. Et quidem haec conciliatio exemplum habet manifestissimum
in spongia, quae per poros ingentes aqua immissa imbuitur. Poros marmorum illorum, &
multo magis vitrorum, non videmus, ac multo minus videre possumus illud, non insinuari
eas substantias nisi per poros. Hoc satis est reliquae inductionis vi, ut dicere debeamus, eo
potissimum pacto se rem habere, & ne ibi quidem violari generalem utique impenetrabilitatis
legem.

simiiisad continu- [2O] 43- Eodem igitur pacto in lege ipsa continuitatis agendum est. Ilia tarn ampla

itatem : duo cas- inductio, quam habemus, debet nos movere ad illam generaliter admittendam etiam pro iis

quibus ean<videatur casibus, in quibus determinare immediate per observations non possumus, an eadem

lacdi- habeatur, uti est collisio corporum ; ac si sunt casus nonnulli, in quibus eadem prima fronte

violari videatur ; ineunda est ratio aliqua, qua ipsum phsenomenum cum ea lege conciliari

possit, uti revera potest. Nonnullos ejusmodi casus protuli in memoratis dissertationibus,

quorum alii ad geometricam continuitatem pertinent, alii ad physicam. In illis prioribus

non immorabor ; neque enim geometrica continuitas necessaria est ad hanc physicam

propugnandam, sed earn ut exemplum quoddam ad confirmationem quandam inductionis

majoris adhibui. Posterior, ut saepe & ilia prior, ad duas classes reducitur ; altera est eorum

casuum, in quibus saltus videtur committi idcirco, quia nos per saltum omittimus intermedias

quantitates : rem exemplo geometrico illustro, cui physicum adjicio.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 59

chosen rules. Now, since the indication may possibly be fallacious, it may happen that an
error may be made ; but there is presumption against such an error, as they call it in law,
until direct evidence to the contrary can be brought forward. Hence we should add :
unless some positive argument is against it. Thus, it would be offending against these rules
to say that large bodies indeed could not suffer compenetration, or enfolding, or be deficient
in inertia, but yet very small parts of them could suffer penetration, or enfolding, or be
without inertia. On the other hand, if a property is relative with respect to our senses,
then, from a result obtained for the larger masses we cannot infer that the same is to be
obtained in its smaller particles ; for instance, that it is the same thing to be sensible, as
it is to be coloured, which is true in the case of large masses, but not in the case of small
particles ; since a distinction of this kind, accidental with respect to matter, is not accidental
with respect to the term sensible or coloured. So also if any property depends on an argu-
ment referring to an aggregate, or a whole, in such a way that it cannot be considered
apart from the whole, or the aggregate ; then, neither must it (that is to say, by that same
argument), be transferred from the whole, or the aggregate, to parts of it. It is on account
of its being a whole that it has parts ; nor can there be a whole without parts. It is on
account of its being figurable & extended that it has some thing that is apart from some
other thing, & therefore that it has parts. Hence those properties, although they are
found in any aggregate of particles of matter, or in any sensible mass, must not however be
transferred by the power of induction to each & every particle."

41. From what has been said it is quite evident that both impenetrability & the Law Both impenetra-
of Continuity can be proved by a kind of induction of this type ; & the former must be c^bf dTm""^
extended to all particles of bodies, no matter how small, & the latter to all additional steps, strated by indue-
however small, made in an instant of time. Now, in the first place, to use this kind of quired for thisSpur-
induction, it is required that the property, for the proof of which it is to be used, must be pose.
observed in a very large number of cases ; for otherwise the probability would be very

small. Also it is required that no case should be observed, in which it can be proved that
it is violated. It is not necessary that, in those cases in which at first sight it is feared that
there may be a failure of the property, that it should be directly proved that there is no
failure. It is sufficient if in those cases some reason can be obtained which will make the
observation agree with the property ; & all the more so, if in other cases an example of
reconciliation can be obtained, & it can be positively proved that sometimes reconciliation
can be obtained in that way.

42. This is just what does happen, when the impenetrability of solid bodies is accepted Application of in-
as a law of Nature through inductive reasoning. For we observe this impenetrability of tr'abiuty.*0 lmpene"
large bodies in innumerable examples of the many bodies that we consider. There are

indeed also cases, in which one would think that it was violated, such as when oil penetrates
wood and marble, & works its way through them, or when light passes through glasses &
gems. But we have ready a means of making these phenomena agree with impenetrability,
derived from the fact that those bodies, into which substances of this kind work their way,
possess pores which they can permeate. There is a very evident example of this recon-
ciliation in a sponge, which is saturated with water introduced into it by means of huge
pores. We do not see the pores of the marble, still less those of glass ; & far less can we see
that these substances do not penetrate except by pores. It satisfies the general force of
induction if we can say that the matter can be explained in this way better than in any
other, & that in this case there is absolutely no contradiction of the general law of impene-
trability.

43. In the same way, then, we must deal with the Law of Continuity. The full Similar application

"

induction that we possess should lead us to admit in general this law even in those cases in ^sisses "oT cases

which it is impossible for us to determine directly by observation whether the same law which there seems

holds good, as for instance in the collision of bodies. Also, if there are some cases in which *

the law at first sight seems to be violated, some method must be followed, through which

each phenomenon can be reconciled with the law, as is in every case possible. I brought

forward several cases of this kind in the dissertations I have mentioned, some of which

pertained to geometrical continuity, & others to physical continuity. I will not delay over

the first of these : for geometrical continuity is not necessary for the defence of the physical

variety ; I used it as an example in confirmation of a wider induction. The latter, as well

as very frequently the former, reduces to two classes ; & the first of these classes is that class

in which a sudden change seems to have been made on account of our having omitted the

intermediate quantities with a jump. I give a geometrical illustration, and then add one

in physics.

6o

PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

Exemplum geome-
tricum primi gene-
ris, ubi nos inter-
mcdias magnitu-
dines omittimus.

Quando id accidat
exempla physica
dierum, & oscilla-
tionum consequen-
tium.

44. In axe curvae cujusdam in fig. 4. sumantur segmenta AC, CE, EG aequalia, &
erigantur ordinatae AB, CD, EF, GH. Area; BACD, DCEF, FEGH videntur continue
cujusdam seriei termini ita, ut ab ilia BACD acl DCEF, & inde ad FEGH immediate
transeatur, & tamen secunda a prima, ut

& tertia a secunda, differunt per quanti-
tates finitas : si enim capiantur CI, EK
sequales BA, DC, & arcus BD transferatur
in IK ; area DIKF erit incrementum se-
cundae supra primam, quod videtur imme-
diate advenire totum absque eo, quod
unquam habitum sit ejus dimidium, vel
quaevis alia pars incrementi ipsius ; ut idcirco
a prima ad secundam magnitudinem areae
itum sit sine transitu per intermedias. At
ibi omittuntur a nobis termini intermedii,

qui continuitatem servant ; si enim ac aequalis FIG. 4.

AC motu continue feratur ita, ut incipiendo

ab AC desinat in CE ; magnitude areae BACD per omnes intermedias bacd abit in magnitu-
dinem DCEF sine ullo saltu, & sine ulla violatione continuitatis.

45. Id sane ubique accidit, ubi initium secundae magnitudinis aliquo intervallo distal
ab initio primas ; sive statim veniat post ejus finem, sive qua vis alia lege ab ea disjungatur.
Sic in pliysicis, si diem concipiamus intervallum temporis ab occasu ad occasum, vel etiam
ab ortu ad occasum, dies praecedens a sequent! quibusdam anni temporibus differt per plura
secunda, ubi videtur fieri saltus sine ullo intermedio die, qui minus differat. At seriem
quidem continuam ii dies nequaquam constituunt. Concipiatur parallelus integer Telluris,
in quo sunt continuo ductu disposita loca omnia, quae eandem latitudinem geographicam
habent ; ea singula loca suam habent durationem diei, & omnium ejusmodi dierum initia,
ac fines continenter fluunt ; donee ad eundem redeatur locum, cujus pr£e-[2i]-cedens dies
est in continua ilia serie primus, & sequens postremus. Illorum omnium dierum magni-
tudines continenter fluunt sine ullo saltu : nos, intermediis omissis, saltum committimus
non Natura. Atque huic similis responsio est ad omnes reliquos casus ejusmodi, in quibus
initia, & fines continenter non fluunt, sed a nobis per saltum accipiuntur. Sic ubi pendulum
oscillat in acre ; sequens oscillatio per finitam magnitudinem distat a praecedente ; sed &
initium & finis ejus finite intervallo temporis distat a prascedentis initio, & fine, ac intermedii
termini continua serie fluente a prima oscillatione ad secundam essent ii, qui haberentur, si
primae, & secundae oscillationis arcu in aequalem partium numerum diviso, assumeretur via
confecta, vel tempus in ea impensum, inter jacens inter fines partium omnium proportion-
alium, ut inter trientem, vel quadrantem prioris arcus, & trientem,vel quadrantem posterioris,
quod ad omnes ejus generis casus facile transferri potest, in quibus semper immediate etiam
demonstrari potest illud, continuitatem nequaquam violari.

Exempla secundi 46. Secunda classis casuum est ea, in qua videtur aliquid momento temporis peragi,

atne«iOTimeUtSsed & tamen peragitur tempore successive, sed perbrevi. Sunt, qui objiciant pro violatione
non momento' tem- continuitatis casum, quo quisquam manu lapidem tenens, ipsi statim det velocitatem
quandam finitam : alius objicit aquae e vase effluentis, foramine constitute aliquanto infra
superficiem ipsius aquae, velocitatem oriri momento temporis finitam. At in priore casu
admodum evidens est, momento temporis velocitatem finitam nequaquam produci. Tempore
opus est, utcunque brevissimo, ad excursum spirituum per nervos, & musculos, ad fibrarum
tensionem, & alia ejusmodi : ac idcirco ut velocitatem aliquam sensibilem demus lapidi,
manum retrahimus, & ipsum aliquandiu, perpetuo accelerantes, retinemus. Sic etiam, ubi
tormentum bellicum exploditur, videtur momento temporis emitti globus, ac totam
celeritatem acquirere ; at id successive fieri, patet vel inde, quod debeat inflammari tota
massa pulveris pyrii, & dilatari aer, ut elasticitate sua globum acceleret, quod quidem fit
omnino per omnes gradus. Successionem multo etiam melius videmus in globe, qui ab
elastro sibi relicto propellatur : quo elasticitas est major, eo citius, sed nunquam momento
temporis velocitas in globum inducitur.

AppUcatio ipsorum 47. Hsec exempla illud praestant, quod aqua per pores spongiae ingressa respectu

ad emuxum1IaquK impenetrabilitatis, ut ea responsione uti possimus in aliis casibus omnibus, in quibus accessio
e vase. aliqua magnitudinis videtur fieri tota momento temporis ; ut nimirum dicamus fieri tempore

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 61

44. In the axis of any curve (Fig. 4) let there be taken the segments AC, CE, EG equal Geometrical ex-
to one another ; & let the ordinates AB, CD, EF, GH be erected. The areas BACD, DCEF, kind where6 Ivl
FEGH seem to be terms of some continuous series such that we can pass directly from BACD omit . intermediate
to DCEF and then on to FEGH, & yet the second differs from the first, & also the third from

the second, by a finite quantity. For if CI, EK are taken equal to BA, DC, & the arc BD
is transferred to the position IK ; then the area DIKF will be the increment of the second
area beyond the first ; & this seems to be directly arrived at as a whole without that which
at any one time is considered to be the half of it, or indeed any other part of the increment
itself : so that, in consequence, we go from the first to the second magnitude of area without
passing through intermediate magnitudes. But in this case we omit intermediate terms
which maintain the continuity ; for if ac is equal to AC, & this is carried by a continuous
motion in such a way that, starting from the position AC it ends up at the position CE,
then the magnitude of the area BACD will pass through all intermediate values such as
bacd until it reaches the magnitude of the area DCEF without any sudden change, & hence
without any breach of continuity.

45. Indeed this always happens when the beginning of the second magnitude is distant when this will
by a definite interval from the beginning of the first ; whether it comes immediately after happen = physical
the end of the first or is disconnected from it by some other law. Thus in physics, if we casTof Consecutive
look upon the day as the interval of time between sunset & sunset, or even between sunrise day^ OI. consecutive
& sunset, the preceding day differs from that which follows it at certain times of the year

by several seconds ; in which case we see that there is a sudden change made, without there
being any intermediate day for which the change is less. But the fact is that these days do
not constitute a continuous series. Let us consider a complete parallel of latitude on the
Earth, along which in a continuous sequence are situated all those places that have the same
geographical latitude. Each of these places has its own duration of the day, & the begin-
nings & ends of days of this kind change uninterruptedly ; until we get back again to the
same place, where the preceding day is the first of that continuous series, & the day that fol-
lows is the last of the series. The magnitudes of all these days continuously alter without there
being any sudden change : it was we who, by omitting the intermediates, made the sudden
change, & not Nature. Similar to this is the answer to all the rest of the cases of the same
kind, in which the beginnings & the ends do not change uninterruptedly, but are observed by
us discontinuously. Similarly, when a pendulum oscillates in air, the oscillation that follows
differs from the oscillation that has gone before by a finite magnitude. But both the begin-
ning & the end of the second differs from the beginning & the end of the first by a finite inter-
val of time ; & the intermediate terms in a continuously varying series from the first oscillation
to the second would be those that would be obtained, if the arcs of the first & second oscilla-
tions were each divided into the same number of equal parts, & the path traversed (or the
time spent in traversing the path) is taken between the ends of all these proportional paths ;
such as that between the third or fourth part of the first arc & the third or fourth part
of the second arc. This argument can be easily transferred so as to apply to all cases of this
kind ; & in such cases it can always be directly proved that there is no breach of continuity.

46. The second class of cases is that in which something seems to have been done in an Examples of the
instant of time, but still it is really done in a continuous, but very short, interval of time. ^iS? the^chan'e
There are some who bring forward, as an objection in favour of a breach of continuity, the is very rapid, but
case in which a man, holding a stone in his hand, gives to it a definite velocity all at once ; f^an^nstant^of
another raises an objection that favours a breach of continuity, in the case of water flowing time.

from a vessel, where, if an opening is made below the level of the surface of the water, a
finite velocity is produced in an instant of time. But in the first case it is perfectly clear
that a finite velocity is in no wise produced in an instant of time. For there is need of
time, although this is exceedingly short, for the passage of cerebral impulses through
the nerves and muscles, for the tension of the fibres, and other things of that sort ; and
therefore, in order to give a definite sensible velocity to the stone, we draw back the hand,
and then retain the stone in it for some time as we continually increase its velocity forwards.
So too when an engine of war is exploded, the ball seems to be driven forth and to acquire
the whole of its speed in an instant of time. But that it is done continuously is clear, if
only from the fact that the whole mass of the gunpowder has to be inflamed and the gas
has to be expanded in order that it may accelerate the ball by its elasticity ; and this latter
certainly takes place by degrees. The continuous nature of this is far better seen in the
case of a ball propelled by releasing a spring ; here the stronger the elasticity, the greater
the speed ; but in no case is the speed imparted to the ball in an instant of time.

47. These examples are superior to that of water entering through the pores of a sponge, Application of
which we employed in the matter of impenetrability ; so that we can make use of this reply *£.gss.e particularly
in all other cases in which some addition to a magnitude seems to have taken place entirely in to the flow of water
an instant of time. Thus, without doubt we may say that it takes place in an exceedingly from a vesse1'

62

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

brevissimo, utique per omnes intermedias magnitudines, ac illsesa penitus lege continuitatis.
Hinc & in aquae effluentis exemplo res eodem redit, ut non unico momento, sed successive
aliquo tempore, & per [22] omnes intermedias magnitudines progignatur velocitas, quod
quidem ita se habere optimi quique Physici affirmant. Et ibi quidem, qui momento
temporis omnem illam velocitatem progigni, contra me affirmet, principium utique, ut
ajunt, petat, necesse est. Neque enim aqua, nisi foramen aperiatur, operculo dimoto,
effluet ; remotio vero operculi, sive manu fiat, sive percussione aliqua, non potest fieri
momento temporis, sed debet velocitatem suam acquirere per omnes gradus ; nisi illud
ipsum, quod quaerimus, supponatur jam definitum, nimirum an in collisione corporum
communicatio motus fiat momento temporis, an per omnes intermedios gradus, & magni-
tudines. Verum eo omisso, si etiam concipiamus momento temporis impedimentum
auferri, non idcirco momento itidem temporis omnis ilia velocitas produceretur ; ilia enim
non a percussione aliqua, sed a pressione superincumbentis aquae orta, oriri utique non
potest, nisi per accessiones continuas tempusculo admodum parvo, sed non omnino nullo :
nam pressio tempore indiget, ut velocitatem progignat, in communi omnium sententia.

Transitus ad meta-

continuis

ut in Geometria.

48. Illaesa igitur esse debet continuitatis lex, nee ad earn evertendam contra inductionem,
tam uberem quidquam poterunt casus allati hucusque, vel iis similes. At ejusdem con-
umcus, tinuitatis aliam metaphysicam rationem adinveni, & proposui in dissertatione De Lege
Continuitatis, petitam ab ipsa continuitatis natura, in qua quod Aristoteles ipse olim
notaverat, communis esse debet limes, qui praecedentia cum consequentibus conjungit, qui
idcirco etiam indivisibilis est in ea ratione, in qua est limes. Sic superficies duo solida
dirimens & crassitudine caret, & est unica, in qua immediatus ab una parte fit transitus ad
aliam ; linea dirimens binas superficiei continuae partes latitudine caret ; punctum continuae
lineae segmenta discriminans, dimensione omni : nee duo sunt puncta contigua, quorum
alterum sit finis prioris segmenti, alterum initium sequentis, cum duo contigua indivisibilia,
& inextensa haberi non possint sine compenetratione, & coalescentia quadam in unum.

idem in tempore 49. Eodem autem pacto idem debet accidere etiam in tempore, ut nimirum inter tempus

«> ti ua^'evide"6 contmuum praecedens, & continuo subsequens unicum habeatur momentum, quod sit
tius in quibusdam. indivisibilis terminus utriusque ; nee duo momenta, uti supra innuimus, contigua esse
possint, sed inter quodvis momentum, & aliud momentum debeat intercedere semper
continuum aliquod tempus divisibile in infinitum. Et eodem pacto in quavis quantitate,
quae continuo tempore duret, haberi debet series quasdam magnitudinum ejusmodi, ut
momento temporis cuivis respondeat sua, quae praecedentem cum consequente conjungat,
& ab ilia per aliquam determinatam magnitudinem differat. Quin immo in illo quantitatum
genere, in quo [23] binae magnitudines simul haberi non possunt, id ipsum multo evidentius
conficitur, nempe nullum haberi posse saltum immediatum ab una ad alteram. Nam illo
momento temporis, quo deberet saltus fieri, & abrumpi series accessu aliquo momentaneo,
deberent haberi duae magnitudines, postrema seriei praecedentis, & prima seriei sequentis.
Id ipsum vero adhuc multo evidentius habetur in illis rerum statibus, in quibus ex una
parte quovis momento haberi debet aliquis status ita, ut nunquam sine aliquo ejus generis
statu res esse possit ; & ex alia duos simul ejusmodi status habere non potest.

inde cur motus ip- ro> \& quidem satis patebit in ipso locali motu, in quo habetur phsenomenum omnibus

calls non fiat, nisi •> . . * , . r r. ...... \ ,. . , . .

per Hneam contin- sane notissimum, sed cujus ratio non ita facile ahunde redditur, inde autem patentissima est,
Corpus a quovis loco ad alium quemvis devenire utique potest motu continuo per lineas
quascunque utcunque contortas, & in immensum productas quaquaversum, quae numero
infinities infinitae sunt : sed omnino debet per continuam aliquam abire, & nullibi inter-
ruptam. En inde rationem ejus rei admodum manifestam. Si alicubi linea motus abrum-
peretur ; vel momentum temporis, quo esset in primo puncto posterioris lineae, esset
posterius eo momento, quo esset in puncto postremo anterioris, vel esset idem, vel anterius ?
In primo, & tertio casu inter ea momenta intercederet tempus aliquod continuum divisibile
in infinitum per alia momenta intermedia, cum bina momenta temporis, in eo sensu accepta,
in quo ego hie ea accipio, contigua esse non possint, uti superiusexposui. Quamobrem in

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 63

short interval of time, and certainly passes through every intermediate magnitude, and that
the Law of Continuity is not violated. Hence also in the case of water flowing from a
vessel it reduces to the same example : so that the velocity is generated, not in a single
instant, but in some continuous interval of time, and passes through all intermediate magni-
tudes ; and indeed all the most noted physicists assert that this is what really happens.
Also in this matter, should anyone assert in opposition to me that the whole of the speed
is produced in an instant of time, then he must use a •petitio principii, as they call it. For
the water can-not flow out, unless the hole is opened, & the lid removed ; & the removal of
the lid, whether done by hand or by a blow, cannot be effected in an instant of time, but
must acquire its own velocity by degrees ; unless we suppose that the matter under investi-
gation is already decided, that is to say, whether in collision of bodies communication of
motion takes place in an instant of time or through all intermediate degrees and magnitudes.
But even if that is left out of account, & if also we assume that the barrier is removed
in an instant of time, none the more on that account would the whole of the velocity
also be produced in an instant of time ; for it is impossible that such velocity can arise,
not from some blow, but from a pressure arising from the superincumbent water, except by
continuous additions in a very short interval of time, which is however not absolutely
nothing ; for pressure requires time to produce velocity, according to the general opinion
of everybody.

48. The Law of Continuity ought then to be subject to no breach, nor will the cases Passing to a meta-
hitherto brought forward, nor others like them, have any power at all to controvert this haveT'smrie'iinUt
law in opposition to induction so copious. Moreover I discovered another argument, a in the case of con-
metaphysical one, in favour of this continuity, & published it in my dissertation De Lege g'^n^iy1"11^' &S "*
Continuitatis, having derived it from the very nature of continuity ; as Aristotle himself long

ago remarked, there must be a common boundary which joins the things that precede to
those that follow ; & this must therefore be indivisible for the very reason that it is a
boundary. In the same way, a surface of separation of two solids is also without thickness
& is single, & in it there is immediate passage from one side to the other ; the line of
separation of two parts of a continuous surface lacks any breadth ; a point determining
segments of a continuous line has no dimension at all ; nor are there two contiguous points,
one of which is the end of the first segment, & the other the beginning of the next ; for
two contiguous indivisibles, of no extent, cannot possibly be considered to exist, unless
there is compenetration & a coalescence into one.

49. In the same way, this should also happen with regard to time, namely, that between similarly for time
a preceding continuous time & the next following there should be a single instant, which ^£y. mor^evi-
is the indivisible boundary of either. There cannot be two instants, as we intimated above, dent in some than
contiguous to one another ; but between one instant & another there must always intervene m others-

some interval of continuous time divisible indefinitely. In the same way, in any quantity
which lasts for a continuous interval of time, there must be obtained a series of magnitudes
of such a kind that to each instant of time there is its corresponding magnitude ; & this
magnitude connects the one that precedes with the one that follows it, & differs from the
former by some definite magnitude. Nay even in that class of quantities, in which we
cannot have two magnitudes at the same time, this very point can be deduced far more
clearly, namely, that there cannot be any sudden change from one to another. For at that
instant, when the sudden change should take place, & the series be broken by some momen-
tary definite addition, two magnitudes would necessarily be obtained, namely, the last of
the first series & the first of the next. Now this very point is still more clearly seen in those
states of things, in which on the one hand there must be at any instant some state so that
at no time can the thing be without some state of the kind, whilst on the other hand it can
never have two states of the kind simultaneously.

50. The above will be sufficiently clear in the case of local motion, in regard to which Hence the reason
the phenomenon is perfectly well known to all ; the reason for it, however, is not so easily ^Jj^ Recurs™;:!10"
derived from any other source, whilst it follows most clearly from this idea. A body can continuous line,
get from any one position to any other position in any case by a continuous motion along

any line whatever, no matter how contorted, or produced ever so far in any direction ;
these lines being infinitely infinite in number. But it is bound to travel by some continuous
line, with no break in it at any point. Here then is the reason of this phenomenon quite
clearly explained. If the motion in the line should be broken at any point, either the
instant of time, at which it was at the first point of the second part of the line, would be
after the instant, at which it was at the last point of the first part of the line, or it would
be the same instant, or before it. In the first & third cases, there would intervene between
the two instants some definite interval of continuous time divisible indefinitely at other
intermediate instants ; for two instants of time, considered in the sense in which I have

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

primo casu in omnibus iis infinitis intermediis momentis nullibi esset id corpus, in secundo
casu idem esset eodem illo memento in binis locis, adeoque replicaretur ; in terio haberetur
replicatio non tantum respectu eorum binorum momentorum, sed omnium etiam inter-
mediorum, in quibus nimirum omnibus id corpus esset in binis locis. Cum igitur corpus
existens nee nullibi esse possit, nee simul in locis pluribus ; ilia vias mutatio, & ille saltus
haberi omnino non possunt.

51. Idem ope Geometric magis adhuc oculis ipsis subjicitur. Exponantur per rectam
AB tempora, ac per ordinatas ad lineas CD, EF, abruptas alicubi, diversi status rei cujuspiam.
e metaphysica, Ductis ordinatis DG, EH, vel punctum H iaceret post G, ut in Fie. c : vel cum ipso

ibus exemphs . • /• i • ij . r T . o J • r

congrueret, ut in 6 ; vel ipsum prsccederet, ut in 7. In pnmo casu nulla responderet
ordinata omnibus punctis rectae GH ; in secundo binae responderent GD, & HE eidem puncto
G ; in tertio vero binae HI, & HE puncto H, binas GD, GK puncto G, & binae LM, LN

Illustratio ejus
i ex Geo-
ratiocina-

tione

pluribus exempl

D E.

D

G H

FIG. 5.

B A

GH

FIG. 6.

H L G

FIG. 7.

puncto cuivis intermedio L ; nam ordinata est relatio quaedam distantly, quam habet
punctum curvae cum puncto axis sibi respondente, adeoque ubi jacent in recta eadem
perpendiculari axi bina curvarum puncta, habentur binae ordinatae respondentes eidem
puncto axis. Quamobrem si nee o-[24]-mni statu carere res possit, nee haberi possint
status simul bini ; necessario consequitur, saltum ilium committi non posse. Saltus ipse, si
deberet accidere, uti vulgo fieri concipitur, accideret binis momentis G, & H, quae sibi in
fig. 6 immediate succederent sine ullo immediato hiatu, quod utique fieri non potest ex
ipsa limitis ratione, qui in continuis debet esse idem, & antecedentibus, & consequentibus
communis, uti diximus. Atque idem in quavis reali serie accidit ; ut hie linea finita sine
puncto primo, & postremo, quod sit ejus limes, & superficies sine linea esse non potest ; unde
fit, ut in casu figurae 6 binae ordinatae necessario respondere debeant eidem puncto : ita in
quavis finita reali serie statuum primus terminus, & postremus haberi necessario debent ;
adeoque si saltus fit, uti supra de loco diximus ; debet eo momento, quo saltus confici
dicitur, haberi simul status duplex ; qui cum haberi non possit : saltus itidem ille haberi
omnino non potest. Sic, ut aliis utamur exemplis, distantia unius corporis ab alio mutari
per saltum non potest, nee densitas, quia dux simul haberentur distantiae, vel duae densitates,
quod utique sine replicatione haberi non potest ; caloris itidem, & frigoris mutatio in
thermometris, ponderis atmosphaerae mutatio in barometris, non fit per saltum, quia binae
simul altitudines mercurii in instrumento haberi deberent eodem momento temporis, quod
fieri utique non potest ; cum quovis momento determinate unica altitude haberi debeat,
ac unicus determinatus caloris gradus, vel frigoris ; quae quidem theoria innumeris casibus
pariter aptari potest.

52. Contra hoc argumentum videtur primo aspectu adesse aliquid, quod ipsum pforsus
non esse conjun- evertat, & tamen ipsi illustrando idoneum est maxime. Videtur nimirum inde erui,

gend s in creatione • •« M • • • • o • • £»• • • J

& annihiiatione, ac impossibilem esse & creationem rei cujuspiam, Scintentum. 01 enim conjungendus est
ejus soiutio. postremus terminus praecedentis seriei cum primo sequentis ;" in ipso transitu a non esse ad

esse, vel vice versa, debebit utrumque conjungi, ac idem simul erit, & non erit, quod est
absurdum. Responsio in promptu est. Seriei finita; realis, & existentis, reales itidem, &
existentes termini esse debent ; non vero nihili, quod nullas proprietates habet, quas exigat,
Hinc si realium statuum seriei altera series realium itidem statuum succedat, quae non
sit communi termino conjuncta ; bini eodem momento debebuntur status, qui nimirum
sint bini limites earundem. At quoniam non esse est merum nihilum ; ejusmodi series
limitem nullum extremum requirit, sed per ipsum esse immediate, & directe excluditur.
Quamobrem primo, & postremo momento temporis ejus continui, quo res est, erit utique,
nee cum hoc esse suum non esse conjunget simul ; at si densitas certa per horam duret, turn
momento temporis in aliam mutetur duplam, duraturam itidem per alteram sequentem
horam ; momento temporis, [25] quod horas dirimit, binae debebunt esse densitates simul,
nimirum & simplex, & dupla, quae sunt reales binarum realium serierum termini.

Objectio ab esse, &

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 65

considered them, cannot be contiguous, as I explained above. Wherefore in the first case,
at all those infinite intermediate instants the body would be nowhere at all ; in the second
case, it would be at the same instant in two different places & so there would be replication.
In the third case, there would not only occur replication in respect of these two instants
but for all those intermediate to them as well, in all of which the body would forsooth be
in two places at the same time. Since then a body that exists can never be nowhere, nor
in several places at one & the same time, there can certainly be no alteration of path & no
sudden change.

51. The same thing can be visualized better with the aid of Geometry. illustration of this

Let times be represented by the straight line AB, & diverse states of any thing by SSyT^STS
ordinates drawn to meet the lines CD, EF, which are discontinuous at some point. If the reasoning being
ordmates DG, EH are drawn, either the point H will fall after the point G, as in Fig. 5 ;
or it will coincide with it, as in Fig. 6 ; or it will fall before it, as in Fig. 7. In the first
case, no ordinate will correspond to any one of the points of the straight line GH ; in the
second case, GD and HE would correspond to the same point G ; in the third case, two
ordinates, HI, HE, would correspond to the same point H, two, GD, GK, to the same
point G, and two, LM, LN, to any intermediate point L. Now the ordinate is some relation
as regards distance, which a point on the curve bears to the point on the axis that corresponds
with it ; & thus, when two points of the curve lie in the same straight line perpendicular
to the axis, we have two ordinates corresponding to the same point of the axis. Wherefore,
if the thing in question can neither be without some state at each instant, nor is it possible
that there should be two states at the same time, then it necessarily follows that the sudden
change cannot be made. For this sudden change, if it is bound to happen, would take place
at the two instants G & H, which immediately succeed the one the other without any direct
gap between them ; this is quite impossible, from the very nature of a limit, which should
be the same for,& common to, both the antecedents & the consequents in a continuous set,
as has been said. The same thing happens in any series of real things ; as in this case there
cannot be a finite line without a first & last point, each to be a boundary to it, neither can
there be a surface without a line. Hence it comes about that in the case of Fig. 6 two
ordinates must necessarily correspond to the same point. Thus, in any finite real series of
states, there must of necessity be a first term & a last ; & so if a sudden change is made, as
we said above with regard to position, there must be at the instant, at which the sudden
change is said to be accomplished, a twofold state at one & the same time. Now since this
can never happen, it follows that this sudden change is also quite impossible. Similarly, to
make use of other illustrations, the distance of one body from another can never be altered
suddenly, no more can its density ; for there would be at one & the same time two distances,
or two densities, a thing which is quite impossible without replication. Again, the change
of heat, or cold, in thermometers, the change in the weight of the air in barometers, does
not happen suddenly ; for then there would necessarily be at one & the same time two
different heights for the mercury in the instrument ; & this could not possibly be the case.
For at any given instant there must be but one height, & but one definite degree of heat,
& but one definite degree of cold ; & this argument can be applied just as well to innu-
merable other cases.

52. Against this argument it would seem at first sight that there is something ready to
hand which overthrows it altogether ; whilst as a matter of fact it is peculiarly fitted to together of existence
exemplify it. It seems that from this argument it follows that both the creation of any * non-existence a.t

•> • „ • i • • -11 rf >r T i <• -i i • the time of creation

thing, & its destruction, are impossible, r or, it the last term of a series that precedes is to Or annihilation ; &

be connected with the first term of the series that follows, then in the passage from a state its solution.

of existence to one of non-existence, or vice versa, it will be necessary that the two are

connected together ; & then at one & the same time the same thing will both exist & not

exist, which is absurd. The answer to this is immediate. For the ends of a finite series

that is real & existent must themselves be real & existent, not such as end up in absolute

nothing, which has no properties. Hence, if to one series of real states there succeeds

another series of real states also, which is not connected with it by a common term, then

indeed there must be two states at the same instant, namely those which are their two

limits. But since non-existence is mere nothing, a series of this kind requires no last limiting

term, but is immediately & directly cut off by fact of existence. Wherefore, at the first &

at the last instant of that continuous interval of time, during which the matter exists, it will

certainly exist ; & its non-existence will not be connected with its existence simultaneously.

On the other hand if a given density persists for an hour, & then is changed in an instant

of time into another twice as great, which will last for another hour ; then in that instant

of time which separates the two hours, there would have to be two densities at one & the

same time, the simple & the double, & these are real terms of two real series.

66

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Unde hue transfer-
enda solutio ipsa.

Solutio petita ex
geometrico exem-
plo.

Solutio
physica
atione.

ex meta-
consider-

Illustratio ulterior
geometrica.

Applicatio ad crea-
tionem, & annihi-
lationem.

D

F

i

\

F

D

f

m m*

\

G

G'

P

L

5

\

MJVI,

'

A

B

C E H H'E'C7

FIG. 8.

53. Id ipsum in dissertatione De lege virium in Natura existentium satis, ni fallor,
luculenter exposui, ac geometricis figuris illustravi, adjectis nonnullis, quae eodem recidunt,
& quae in applicatione ad rem, de qua agimus, & in cujus gratiam haec omnia ad legem con-
tinuitatis pertinentia allata sunt, proderunt infra ; libet autem novem ejus dissertationis
numeros hue transferre integros, incipiendo ab octavo, sed numeros ipsos, ut & schematum
numeros mutabo hie, ut cum superioribus consentiant.

54. " Sit in fig. 8 circulus GMM'wz, qui referatur ad datam rectam AB per ordinatas
HM ipsi rectae perpendiculares ; uti itidem perpendiculares sint binae tangentes EGF,
E'G'F'. Concipiantur igitur recta quaedam indefinita ipsi rectse AB perpendicularis, motu
quodam continuo delata ab A ad B. Ubi ea habuerit, positionem quamcumque GD, quae
praecedat tangentem EF, vel C'D', quae consequatur tangentem E'F' ; ordinata ad circulum
nulla erit, sive erit impossibilis, & ut Geometrae

loquuntur, imaginaria. Ubicunque autem ea sit

inter binas tangentes EGF, E'G'F', in HI, HT,

occurret circulo in binis punctis M, m, vel M', m',

& habebitur valor ordinate HM, HOT, vel H'M',

H'm'. Ordinata quidem ipsa respondet soli inter-

vallo EE' : & si ipsa linea AB referat tempus ;

momentum E est limes inter tempus praecedens

continuum AE, quo ordinata non est, & tempus

continuum EE' subsequens, quo ordinata est ; punc-

tum E' est limes inter tempus praecedens EE', quo

ordinata est, & subsequens E'B, quo non est. Vita

igitur quaedam ordinatae est tempus EE' ; ortus

habetur in E, interitus in E'. Quid autem in

ipso ortu, & interitu ? Habetur-ne quoddam esse

ordinatas, an non esse ? Habetur utique esse, nimi-

rum EG, vel E'G', non autem non esse. Oritur

tota finitae magnitudinis ordinata EG, interit tota finite magnitudinis E'G', nee tamen

ibi conjungit esse, & non esse, nee ullum absurdum secum trahit. Habetur momento E

primus terminus seriei sequentis sine ultimo seriei praecedentis, & habetur momento E'

ultimus terminus seriei praecedentis sine primo termino seriei sequentis."

55. " Quare autem id ipsum accidat, si metaphysica consideratione rem perpendimus,
statim patebit. Nimirum veri nihili nullae sunt verae proprietates : entis realis verae, &
reales proprietates sunt. Quaevis realis series initium reale debet, & finem, sive primum, &
ultimum terminum. Id, quod non est, nullam habet veram proprietatem, nee proinde sui
generis ultimum terminum, aut primum exigit. Series praecedens ordinatae nullius, ultimum
terminum non [26] habet, series consequens non habet primum : series realis contenta
intervallo EE', & primum habere debet, & ultimum. Hujus reales termini terminum ilium
nihili per se se excludunt, cum ipsum esse per se excludat non esse."

56. " Atque id quidem manifestum fit magis : si consideremus seriem aliquam
praecedentem realem, quam exprimant ordinatae ad lineam continuam PLg, quae respondeat
toti tempori AE ita, ut cuivis momento C ejus temporis respondeat ordinata CL. Turn
vero si momento E debeat fieri saltus ab ordinata Eg ad ordinatam EG : necessario ipsi
momento E debent respondere binae ordinatae EG, Eg. Nam in tota linea PLg non potest
deesse solum ultimum punctum g ; cum ipso sublato debeat adhuc ilia linea terminum
habere suum, qui terminus esset itidem punctum : id vero punctum idcirco fuisset ante
contiguum puncto g, quod est absurdum, ut in eadem dissertatione De Lege Continuitatis
demonstravimus. Nam inter quodvis punctum, & aliud punctum linea aliqua interjacere
debet ; quae si non inter jaceat ; jam ilia puncta in unicum coalescunt. Quare non potest
deesse nisi lineola aliqua gL ita, ut terminus seriei praecedentis sit in aliquo momento C
praecedente momentum E, & disjuncto ab eo per tempus quoddam continuum, in cujus
temporis momentis omnibus ordi'nata sit nulla."

57. " Patet igitur discrimen inter transitum a vero nihilo, nimirum a quantitate
imaginaria, ad esse, & transitum ab una magnitudine ad aliam. In primo casu terminus
nihili non habetur ; habetur terminus uterque seriei veram habentis existentiam, & potest
quantitas, cujus ea est series, oriri, vel occidere quantitate finita, ac per se excludere non esse.
In secundo casu necessario haberi debet utriusque seriei terminus, alterius nimirum postre-
mus, alterius primus. Quamobrem etiam in creatione, & in annihilatione potest quantitas
oriri, vel interire magnitudine finita, & primum, ac ultimum esse erit quoddam esse, quod
secum non conjunget una non esse. Contra vero ubi magnitude realis ab una quantitate ad

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 67

c*. I explained this very point clearly enough, if I mistake not, in my dissertation The s0"166 from

n i • • • JIT- . • ' . • a T -11 j v i ... • i A 'IT ^ which the solution

D,? lege vmum in Natura existentium, & 1 illustrated it by geometrical figures ; also I made u to be borrowed.

some additions that reduced to the same thing. These will appear below, as an application

to the matter in question ; for the sake of which all these things relating to the Law of

Continuity have been adduced. It is allowable for me to quote in this connection the

whole of nine articles from that dissertation, beginning with Art. 8 ; but I will here

change the numbering of the articles, & of the diagrams as well, so that they may agree

with those already given.

54. " In Fig. 8, let GMM'm be a circle, referred to a given straight line AB as axis, by Sotoion derived
means of ordinates HM drawn perpendicular to that straight line ; also let the two tan- exampief"
gents EGF, E'G'F' be perpendiculars to the axis. Now suppose that an unlimited straight

line perpendicular to the axis AB is carried with a continuous motion from A to B. When
it reaches some such position as CD preceding the tangent EF, or as C'D' subsequent to
the tangent E'F', there will be no ordinate to the circle, or it will be impossible &, as the
geometricians call it, imaginary. Also, wherever it falls between the two tangents EGF,
E'G'F', as at HI or HT, it will meet the circle in two points, M, m or M', m' ; & for the
value of the ordinate there will be obtained HM & Hm, or H'M' & H'm'. Such an ordinate
will correspond to the interval EE' only ; & if the line AB represents time, the instant E
is the boundary between the preceding continuous time AE, in which the ordinate does
not exist, £ the subsequent continuous time EE', in which the ordinate does exist. The
point E' is the boundary between the preceding time EE', in which the ordinate does exist,
& the subsequent time E'B, in which it does not ; the lifetime, as it were, of the ordinate,
is EE' ; its production is at E & its destruction at E'. But what happens at this production
& destruction ? Is it an existence of the ordinate, or a non-existence I Of a truth there
is an existence, represented by EG & E'G', & not a non-existence. The whole ordinate EG
of finite magnitude is produced, & the whole ordinate E'G' of finite magnitude is destroyed;
& yet there is no connecting together of the states of existence & non-existence, nor does it
bring in anything absurd in its train. At the instant E we get the first term of the sub-
sequent series without the last term of the preceding series ; & at the instant E' we have
the last term of the preceding series without the first term of the subsequent series."

55. " The reason why this should happen is immediately evident, if we consider the Sol«tion from a
matter metaphysically. Thus, to absolute nothing there belong no real properties ; but Sderatwn!*

the properties of a real absolute entity are also real. Any real series must have a real
beginning & end, or a first term & a last. That which does not exist can have no true
property ; & on that account does not require a last term of its kind, or a first. The
preceding series, in which there is no ordinate, does not have a last term ; & the subsequent
series has likewise no first term ; whilst the real series contained within the interval EE'
must have both a first term & a last term. The real terms of this series of themselves
exclude the term of no value, since the fact of existence of itself excludes non-existence"

56. " This indeed will be still more evident, if we consider some preceding series of Further illustration

i • • 11 i • i i i • T.T r „ i i • by geometry.

real quantities, expressed by the ordinates to the curved line PLg ; & let this curve
correspond to the whole time AE in such a way that to every instant C of the time there
corresponds an ordinate CL. Then, if at the instant E there is bound to be a sudden
change from the ordinate Eg to the ordinate EG, to that instant E there must of necessity
correspond both the ordinates EG, Eg. For it is impossible that in the whole line PLg
the last point alone should be missing ; because, if that point is taken away, yet the line
is Bound to have an end to it, & that end must also be a point ; hence that point would be
before & contiguous to the point g ; & this is absurd, as we have shown in the same
dissertation De Lege Continuitatis. For between any one point & any other point there
must lie some line ; & if such a line does not intervene, then those points must coalesce
into one. Hence nothing can be absent, except it be a short length of line gL, so that
the end of the series that precedes occurs at some instant, C, preceding the instant E, &
separated from it by an interval of continuous time, at all instants of which there is no
ordinate."

157. "Evidently, then, there is a distinction between passing from absolute nothing, Application to crea-

•f' . '' . ... °. , . Y tion& annihilation.

i.e., from an imaginary quantity, to a state of existence, & passing from one magnitude
to another. In the first case the term which is naught is not reckoned in ; the term at
either end of a series which has real existence is given, & the quantity, of which it is the
series, can be produced or destroyed, finite in amount ; & of itself it will exclude non-
existence. In the second case, there must of necessity be an end to either series, namely
the last of the one series & the first of the other. Hence, in creation & annihilation,
a quantity can be produced or destroyed, finite in magnitude ; & the first & last
state of existence will be a state of existence of some kind ; & this will not associate with
itself a state of non-existence. But, on the other hand, where a real magnitude is bound

68

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Aliquando videri
nihtium id, quod
est aliquid.

Ordinatam nullam,
ut & distantiam
nullam existentium
esse compenetra-
tionem.

Ad idem pertinere
seriei realis genus
earn distan t i a m
nullam, & aliquam.

Alia, quje videntur
nihil, & sunt ali-
quid : discrimen
inter radicem ima-
ginariam, & zero.

aliam transire debet per saltum ; momento temporis, quo saltus committitur, uterque
terminus haberi deberet. Manet igitur illaesum argumentum nostrum metaphysicum pro
exclusione saltus a creatione & annihilatione, sive ortu, & interitu."

58. "At hie illud etiam notandum est ; quoniam ad ortum, & interitum considerandum
geometricas contemplationes assumpsimus, videri quidem prima fronte, aliquando etiam
realis seriei terminum postremum esse nihilum ; sed re altius considerata, non erit vere
nihilum ; sed status quidam itidem realis, & ejusdem generis cum prsecedentibus, licet alio
nomine insignitus."

[27] 59. " Sit in Fig. 9. Linea AB, ut prius, ad quam linea qusedam PL deveniat in G
(pertinet punctum G ad lineam PL, E ad AB continuatas, & sibi occurrentes ibidem), & sive
pergat ultra ipsam in GM', sive retro resiliat per GM'. Recta CD habebit ordinatam CL,
quas evanescet, ubi puncto C abeunte in E, ipsa CD abibit in EF, turn in positione ulteriori
rectse perpendicularis HI, vel abibit in nega-
tivam HM, vel retro positiva regredietur
in HM'. Ubi linea altera cum altera coit,
& punctum E alterius cum alterius puncto
G congreditur, ordinata CL videtur abire in
nihilum ita, ut nihilum, quemadmodum &
supra innuimus, sit limes quidam inter seriem
ordinatarum positivarum CL, & negativarum
HM ; vel positivarum CL, & iterum posi-
tivarum HM'. Sed, si res altius considere-
tur ad metaphysicum conceptum reducta,
in situ EF non habetur verum nihilum.
In situ CD, HI habetur distantia quaedam
punctorum C, L ; H, M : in situ EF
habetur eorundem punctorum compene-

tratio. Distantia est relatio quaedam FJG

binorum modorum, quibus bina puncta

existunt ; compenetratio itidem est relatio binorum modorum, quibus ea existunt,
quae compenetratio est aliquid reale ejusdem prorsus generis, cujus est distantia, constituta
nimirum per binos reales existendi modos."

60. " Totum discrimen est in vocabulis, quae nos imposuimus. Bini locales existendi
modi infinitas numero relationes possunt constituere, alii alias. Hae omnes inter se &
differunt, & tamen simul etiam plurimum conveniunt ; nam reales sunt, & in quodam genere
congruunt, quod nimirum sint relationes ortae a binis localibus existendi modis. Diversa
vero habent nomina ad arbitrarium instituta, cum alise ex ejusmodi relationibus, ut CL,
dicantur distantiae positivae, relatio EG dicatur compenetratio, relationes HM dicantur
distantiae negativse. Sed quoniam, ut a decem palmis distantiae demptis 5, relinquuntur 5,
ita demptis aliis 5, habetur nihil (non quidem verum nihil, sed nihil in ratione distantiae a
nobis ita appellatae, cum remaneat compenetratio) ; ablatis autem aliis quinque, remanent
quinque palmi distantiae negativae ; ista omnia realia sunt, & ad idem genus pertinent ; cum
eodem prorsus modo inter se differant distantia palmorum 10 a distantia palmorum 5, haec
a distantia nulla, sed reali, quas compenetrationem importat, & haec a distantia negativa
palmorum 5. Nam ex prima ilia quantitate eodem modo devenitur ad hasce posteriores per
continuam ablationem palmorum 5. Eodem autem pacto infinitas ellipses, ab infinitis
hyperbolis unica interjecta parabola discriminat, quae quidem unica nomen peculiare sortita
est, cum illas numero infinitas, & a se invicem admodum discrepantes unico vocabulo com-
plectamur ; licet altera magis oblonga ab altera minus oblonga plurimum itidem diversa sit."

[28] 61. " Et quidem eodem pacto status quidam realis est quies, sive perseverantia in
eodem modo locali existendi ; status quidam realis est velocitas nulla puncti existentis.
nimirum determinatio perseverandi in eodem loco ; status quidam realis puncti existentis
est vis nulla, nimirum determinatio retinendi praecedentem velocitatem, & ita porro ;
plurimum haec discrepant a vero non esse. Casus ordinatae respondentis lineae EF in fig. 9,
differt plurimum a casu ordinatae circuli respondentis lineae CD figurae 8 : in prima existunt
puncta, sed compenetrata, in secunda alterum punctum impossible est. Ubi in solutione
problematum devenitur ad quantitatem primi generis, problema determinationem peculiarem
accipit ; ubi devenitur ad quantitatem secundi generis, problema evadit impossible ; usque
adeo in hoc secundo casu habetur verum nihilum, omni reali proprietate carens ; in illo
primo habetur aliquid realibus proprietatibus praeditum, quod ipsis etiam solutionibus
problematum, & constructionibus veras sufficit, & reales determinationes ; cum realis, non
imaginaria sit radix equationis cujuspiam, quae sit = o, sive nihilo aequalis."

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 69

to pass suddenly from one quantity to another, then at the instant in which the sudden
change is accomplished, both terms must be obtained. Hence, our argument on
metaphysical grounds in favour of the exclusion of a sudden change from creation or
annihilation, or production & destruction, remains quite unimpaired."

58. " In this connection the following point must be noted. As we have used geometrical Sometimes what is
ideas for the consideration of production & destruction, it seems also that sometimes reallysomethingap-
the last term of a real series is nothing. But if we go deeper into the matter, we find

that it is not in reality nothing, but some state that is also real and of the same kind as
those that precede it, though designated by another name."

59. " In Fig. 9, let AB be a line, as before, which some line PL reaches at G (where the When the ordinate
point G belongs to the line PL, & E to the line AB, both being produced to meet one whe^thT'dlst^n'13
another at this point) ; & suppose that PL either goes on beyond the point as GM, or between two exis-
recoils along GM'. Then the straight line CD will contain the ordinate CL, which will ^ tJ1™gs .u no"

_ & „, . . . ' . thing, there is com-

vanish when, as the point L, gets to H, L-D attains the position r,r ; & after that, in the penetration.

further position of the perpendicular straight line HI, will either pass on to the negative

ordinate HM or return, once more positive, to HM'. Now when the one line meets the

other, & the point E of the one coincides with the point G of the other, the ordinate

CL seems to run off into nothing in such a manner that nothing, as we remarked above,

is a certain boundary between the series of positive ordinates CL & the negative ordinates

HM, or between the positive ordinates CL & the ordinates HM' which are also positive.

But if the matter is more deeply considered & reduced to a metaphysical concept, there

is not an absolute nothing in the position EF. In the position CD, or HI, we have given

a certain distance between the points C,L, or H,M ; in the position EF, there is

compenetration of these points. Now distance is a relation between the modes of existence

of two points ; also compenetration is a relation between two modes of existence ; &

this compenetration is something real of the very same nature as distance, founded as it is

on two real modes of existence."

60. " The whole difference lies in the words that we have given to the things in question. ™s ' no ' distance
Two local modes of existence can constitute an infinite number of relations, some of one kmdT^f °series "of
sort & some of another. All of these differ from one another, & yet agree with one real quantities as

•i • i • i j r ia • • j • i • • j j ' some ' distance.

another in a high degree ; ior they are real & to a certain extent identical, since indeed
they are all relations arising from a pair of local modes of existence. But they have different
names assigned to them arbitrarily, so that some of the relations of this kind, as CL, are
called positive distances, the relation EG is called compenetration, & relations like HM
are called negative distances. But, just as when five palms of distance are taken away
from ten palms, there are left five palms, so when five more are taken away, there is nothing
left (& yet not really nothing, but nothing in comparison with what we usually call
distance ; for compenetration is left). Again, if we take away another five, there remain
five palms of negative distance. All of these are real & belong to the same class ; for
they differ amongst themselves in exactly the same way, namely, the distance of ten palms
from the distance of five palms, the latter from ' no ' distance (which however is something
real that denotes compenetration), & this again from a negative distance of five palms.
For starting with the first quantity, the others that follow are obtained in the same manner,
by a continual subtraction of five palms. In a similar manner a single intermediate
parabola discriminates between an infinite number of ellipses & an infinite number of
hyperbolas ; & this single curve receives a special name, whilst under the one term we include
an infinite number of them that to a certain extent are all different from one another,
although one that is considerably elongated may be very different from another that is
less elongated."

61. "In the same way, rest, i.e., a perseverance in the same mode of local existence, other things that
is some real state ; so is ' no ' velocity a real state of an existent point, namely, a propensity ^ndVet^re^eaJi^
to remain in the same place ; so also is ' no ' force a real state of an existent point, namely, something ; d i s-
a propensity to retain the velocity that it has already; & so on. All these differ from a'~"

a state of non-existence in the highest degree. The case of the ordinate corresponding & zero/
to the line EF in Fig. 9 differs altogether from the case of the ordinate of the circle
corresponding to the line CD in Fig. 8. In the first there exist two points, but there is
compenetration of these points ; in the other case, the second point cannot possibly exist.
When, in the solution of problems, we arrive at a quantity of the first kind, the problem
receives a special sort of solution ; but when the result is a quantity of the second kind,
the problem turns out to be incapable of solution. So much indeed that, in this second case,
there is obtained a true nothing that lacks every real property ; in the first case, we get
something endowed with real properties, which also supplies true & real values to the
solutions & constructions of the problems. For the root of any equation that = o, or is
equal to nothing, is something that is real, & is not an imaginary thing."

70 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Conciusip prosolu- fa. " Firmum igitur manebit semper. & stabile, seriem realem quamcunque. quas

tione ejus objec- . ~ °. , , , v » „ ... a i • r

contmuo tempore finito duret, debere habere £ primum prmcipium, & ultimum nnem
realem, sine ullo absurdo, & sine conjunctione sui esse cum non esse, si forte duret eo solo
tempore : dum si prascedenti etiam exstitit tempore, habere debet & ultimum terminum
seriei praecedentis, & primum sequentis, qui debent esse unicus indivisibilis communis limes,
ut momentum est unicus indivisibilis limes inter tempus continuum praecedens, & subsequens.
Sed haec de ortu, & interitu jam satis."

Apphcatio leg is ft- ijt igitur contrahamus iam vela, continuitatis lex & inductione, & metaphysico

contmuitatis ad J , ° , . . • i • • • • • . .. . . r ' .

coiiisionem corpo- argumento abunde nititur, quas idcirco etiam in velocitatis commumcatione retmeri omnmo
rum- debet, ut nimirum ab una velocitate ad aliam numquam transeatur, nisi per intermedias

velocitates omnes sine saltu. Et quidem in ipsis motibus, & velocitatibus inductionem
habuimus num. 39, ac difficultates solvimus num. 46, & 47 pertinentes ad velocitates, quae
videri possent mutatse per saltum. Quod autem pertinet ad metaphysicum argumentum, si
toto tempore ante contactum subsequentis corporis superficies antecedens habuit 12 gradus
velocitatis, & sequenti 9, saltu facto momentaneo ipso initio contactus ; in ipso momento ea
tempora dirimente debuisset habere & 12, & 9 simul, quod est absurdum. Duas enim
velocitates simul habere corpus non potest, quod ipsum aliquanto diligentius demonstrabo.

DUO velocitatum g, Velocitatis nomen, uti passim usurpatur a Mechanicis, asquivocum est; potest

genera, potentials, T r r . T. . r

& actuaiis. enim sigmncare velocitatem actuaiem, quas nimirum est relatio quaedam in motu asquabm

spatii percursi divisi per tempus, quo percurritur ; & potest significare [29] quandam, quam
apto Scholiasticorum vocabulo potentialem appello, quae nimirum est determinatio, ad
actuaiem, sive determinatio, quam habet mobile, si nulla vis mutationem inducat, percur-
rendi motu asquabili determinatum quoddam spatium quovis determinato tempore, quas
quidem duo & in dissertatione De Viribus Fivis, & in Stayanis Supplements distinxi,
distinctione utique .necessaria ad aequivocationes evitandas. Prima haberi non potest
momento temporis, sed requirit tempus continuum, quo motus fiat, & quidem etiam motum
aequabilem requirit ad accuratam sui mensuram ; secunda habetur etiam momento quovis
determinata ; & hanc alteram intelligunt utique Mechanici, cum scalas geometricas effor-
mant pro motibus quibuscunque difformibus, sive abscissa exprimente tempus, & ordinata
velocitatem, utcunque etiam variatam, area exprimat spatium : sive abscissa exprimente
itidem tempus, & ordinata vim, area exprimat velocitatem jam genitam, quod itidem in aliis
ejusmodi scalis, & formulis algebraicis fit passim, hac potentiali velocitate usurpata, quas sit
tantummodo determinatio ad actuaiem, quam quidem ipsam intelligo, ubi in collisione
corporum earn nego mutari posse per saltum ex hoc posteriore argumento.

^5' Jam vero velocitates actuales non posse simul esse duas in eodem mobili, satis patet ;
potentials 'simul quia oporteret, id mobile, quod initio dati cujusdam temporis fuerit in dato spatii puncto,
ne^eturn<vei exf<*a- ^n omnibus sequentibus occupare duo puncta ejusdem spatii, ut nimirum spatium percursum
tur compenetratfo. sit duplex, alterum pro altera velocitate determinanda, adeoque requireretur actuaiis
replicatio, quam non haberi uspiam, ex principio inductionis colligere sane possumus
admodum facile. Cum nimirum nunquam videamus idem mobile simul ex eodem loco
discedere in partes duas, & esse simul in duobis locis ita, ut constet nobis, utrobique esse illud
idem. At nee potentiales velocitates duas simul esse posse, facile demonstratur. Nam
velocitas potentialis est determinatio ad existendum post datum tempus continuum quodvis
in dato quodam puncto spatii habente datam distantiam a puncto spatii, in quo mobile est
eo temporis momento, quo dicitur habere illam potentialem velocitatem determinatam.
Quamobrem habere simul illas duas potentiales velocitates est esse determinatum ad occu-
panda eodem momento temporis duo puncta spatii, quorum singula habeant suam diversam
distantiam ab eo puncto spatii, in quo turn est mobile, quod est esse determinatum ad
replicationem habendam momentis omnibus sequentis temporis. Dicitur utique idem
mobile a diversis causis acquirere simul diversas velocitates, sed eae componuntur in unicam
ita, ut singulas constituant statum mobilis, qui status respectu dispositionum, quas eo
momento, in quo turn est, habet ipsum mobile, complectentium omnes circumstantias
praeteritas, & praesentes, est tantummodo conditionatus, non absolutus ; nimirum ut con-
tineant determi-[3o]-nationem, quam ex omnibus praeteritis, & praesentibus circumstantiis
haberet ad occupandum illud determinatum spatii punctum determinato illo momento

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 71

62. "Hence in all cases it must remain a firm &stable conclusion that any real series, Conclusion in

,.,, , c. . . .1 i, c i • • r- i favour of a solution

which lasts for some finite continuous time, is bound to have a first beginning & a final Of this difficulty.

end, without any absurdity coming in, & without any linking up of its existence with

a state of non-existence, if perchance it lasts for that interval of time only. But if it existed

at a previous time as well, it must have both a last term of the preceding series & a first

term of the subsequent series ; just as an instant is a single indivisible boundary between

the continuous time that precedes & that which follows. But what I have said about

production & destruction is already quite enough."

63. But, to come back at last to our point, the Law of Continuity is solidly founded Application of the
both on induction & on metaphysical reasoning ; & on that account it should be retained ^The* co5ision"af
in every case of communication of velocity. So that indeed there can never be any passing solid bodies.
from one velocity to another except through all intermediate velocities, & then without

any sudden change. We have employed induction for actual motions & velocities in
Art. 39 & solved difficulties with regard to velocities in Art. 46, 47, in cases in which they
might seem to be subject to sudden changes. As regards metaphysical argument, if in the
whole time before contact the anterior surface of the body that follows had 12 degrees of
velocity & in the subsequent time had 9, a sudden change being made at the instant of first
contact ; then at the instant that separates the two times, the body would be bound to have
12 degrees of velocity, & 9, at one & the same time. This is absurd ; for a body cannot at
the same time have two velocities, as I will now demonstrate somewhat more carefully.

64. The term velocity, as it is used in general by Mechanicians is equivocal. For it Two kinds of veio-
may mean actual velocity, that is to say, a certain relation in uniform motion given by Clty< P°tentlal &
the space passed over divided by the time taken to traverse it. It may mean also something

which, adopting a term used by the Scholastics, I call potential velocity. The latter is
a propensity for actual velocity, or a propensity possessed by the movable body (should
no force cause an alteration) for traversing with uniform motion some definite space in
any definite time. I made the distinction between these two meanings, both in the
dissertation De Firibus Fivis & in the Supplements to Stay's Philosophy ; the distinction
being very necessary to avoid equivocations. The former cannot be obtained in an instant
of time, but requires continuous time for the motion to take place ; it also requires uniform
motion in order to measure it accurately. The latter can be determined at any given
instant ; & it is this kind that is everywhere intended by Mechanicians, when they make
geometrical measured diagrams for any non-uniform velocities whatever. In which, if
the abscissa represents time & the ordinate velocity, no matter how it is varied, then
the area will express the distance passed over ; or again, if the abscissa represents time
& the ordinate force, then the area will represent the velocity already produced. This
is always the case, for other scales of the same kind, whenever algebraical formulae &
this potential velocity are employed ; the latter being taken to be but the propensity for
actual velocity, such indeed as I understand it to be, when in collision of bodies I deny
from the foregoing argument that there can be any sudden change.

65. Now it is quite clear that there cannot be two actual velocities at one & the same I4 is impossible
time in the same moving body. For, then it would be necessary that the moving body, have two velocities"
which at the beginning of a certain time occupied a certain given point of space, should at either actual or
all times afterwards occupy two points of that space ; so that the space traversed would be ^given) or we are
twofold, the one space being determined by the one velocity & the other by the other, forced to admit,
Thus an actual replication would be required ; & this we can clearly prove in a perfectly penetration 'S
simple way from the principle of induction. Because, for instance, we never see the same

movable body departing from the same place in two directions, nor being in two places at
the same time in such a way that it is clear to us that it is in both. Again, it can be easily
proved that it is also impossible that there should be two potential velocities at the same
time. For potential velocity is the propensity that the body has, at the end of any given
continuous time, for existing at a certain given point of space that has a given distance
from that point of space, which the moving body occupied at the instant of time in which
it is said to have the prescribed potential velocity. Wherefore to have at one & the same
time two potential velocities is the same thing as being prescribed to occupy at the same
instant of time two points of space ; each of which has its own distinct distance from that
point of space that the body occupied at the start ; & this is the same thing as prescribing
that there should be replication at all subsequent instants of time. It is commonly said
that a movable body acquires from different causes several velocities simultaneously ; but
these velocities are compounded into one in such a way that each produces a state of the
moving body ; & this state, with regard to the dispositions that it has at that instant (these
include all circumstances both past & present), is only conditional, not absolute. That is
to say, each involves the propensity which the body, on account of all past & present
circumstances, would have for occupying that prescribed point of space at that particular

72 PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

temporis ; nisi aliunde ejusmodi determinatio per conjunctionem alterius causae, quae turn
agat, vel jam egerit, mutaretur, & loco ipsius alia, quae composita dicitur, succederet. Sed
status absolutus resultans ex omnibus eo momento praasentibus, & prseteritis circumstantiis
ipsius mobilis, est unica determinatio ad existendum pro quovis determinato momento
temporis sequentis in quodam determinato puncto spatii, qui quidem status pro circum-
stantiis omnibus praeteritis, & prsesentibus est absolutus, licet sit itidem conditionatus pro
futuris : si nimirum esedem, vel alias causa; agentes sequentibus momentis non mutent
determinationem, & punctum illud loci, ad quod revera deveniri deinde debet dato illo
momento temporis, & actu devenitur ; si ipsae nihil aliud agant. Porro patet ejusmodi
status ex omnibus prseteritis, & praesentibus circumstantiis absolutes non posse eodem
momento temporis esse duos sine determinatione ad replicationem, quam ille conditionatus
status resultans e singulis componentibus velocitatibus non inducit ob id ipsum, quod
conditionatus est. Jam vero si haberetur saltus a velocitate ex omnibus prsteritis, &
praesentibus circumstantiis exigente, ex. gr. post unum minutum, punctum spatii distans
per palmos 6 ad exigentem punctum distans per palmos 9 ; deberet eo momento temporis,
quo fieret saltus, haberi simul utraque determinatio absoluta respectu circumstantiarum
omnium ejus momenti, & omnium praeteritarum ; nam toto prsecedenti tempore habita
fuisset realis series statuum cum ilia priore, & toto sequenti deberet haberi cum ilia
posteriore, adeoque eo momento, simul utraque, cum neutra series realis sine reali suo
termino stare possit.

Quovis momento 66. Praeterea corporis, vel puncti existentis potest utique nulla esse velocitas actualis,

denbeUre hTbeTe saltern accurate talis ; si nimirum difformem habeat motum, quod ipsum etiam semper in

statum reaiem ex Natura accidit, ut demonstrari posse arbitror, sed hue non pertinet ; at semper utique

potentialis'6 li!itlS haberi debet aliqua velocitas potentialis, vel saltern aliquis status, qui licet alio vocabulo

appellari soleat, & dici velocitas nulla, est tamen non nihilum quoddam, sed realis status,

nimirum determinatio ad quietem, quanquam hanc ipsam, ut & quietem, ego quidem

arbitrer in Natura reapse haberi nullam, argumentis, quae in Stayanis Supplementis exposui

in binis paragraphis de spatio, ac tempore, quos hie addam in fine inter nonnulla, quae hie

etiam supplementa appellabo, & occurrent primo, ac secundo loco. Sed id ipsum itidem

nequaquam hue pertinet. lis etiam penitus praetermissis, eruitur e reliquis, quae diximus,

admisso etiam ut existente, vel possibili in Natura motu uniformi, & quiete, utramque

velocitatem habere conditiones necessarias ad [31] hoc, ut secundum argumentum pro

continuitatis lege superius allatum vim habeat suam, nee ab una velocitate ad alteram abiri

possit sine transitu per intermedias.

ento te^oris'trari" ^7' Patet autenij nmc illud evinci, nee interire momento temporis posse, nee oriri

sin ab una veioci- velocitatem totam corporis, vel puncti non simul intereuntis, vel orientis, nee hue transferri
demonstratliai& Posse» quod de creatione, & morte diximus ; cum nimirum ipsa velocitas nulla corporis, vel
vindicatur. puncti existentis, sit non purum nihil, ut monui, sed realis quidam status, qui simul cum

alio reali statu determinatae illius intereuntis, vel orientis velocitatis deberet conjungi ; unde
etiam fit, ut nullum effugium haberi possit contra superiora argumenta, dicendo, quando a
12 gradibus velocitatis transitur ad 9, durare utique priores 9, & interire reliquos tres, in
quo nullum absurdum sit, cum nee in illorum duratione habeatur saltus, nee in saltu per
interitum habeatur absurdi quidpiam, ejus exemplo, quod superius dictum fuit, ubi ostensum
est, non conjungi non esse simul, & esse. Nam in primis 12 gradus velocitatis non sunt quid
compositum e duodecim rebus inter se distinctis, atque disjunctis, quarum 9 manere possint,
3 interire, sed sunt unica determinatio ad existendum in punctis spatii distantibus certo
intervallo, ut palmorumi2, elapsis datis quibusdam temporibus aequalibus quibusvis. Sic
etiam in ordinatis GD, HE, quae exprimunt velocitates in fig. 6, revera, in mea potissimuim
Theoria, ordinata GD non est quaedam pars ordinatae HE communis ipsi usque ad D, sed
sunt duae ordinatae, quarum prima constitit in relatione distantiaa, puncti curvae D a puncto
axis G, secunda in relatione puncti curvae E a puncto axis H, quod estibi idem, ac punctum G.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 73

instant of time ; were it not for the fact that that particular propensity is for other reasons
altered by the conjunction of another cause, which acts at the time, or has already done so ;
& then another propensity, which is termed compound, will take the place of the former.
But the absolute propensity, which arises from the combination of all the past & present
circumstances of the moving body for that instant, is but a single propensity for existing at
any prescribed instant of subsequent time in a certain prescribed point of space ; & this
state is absolute for all past & present circumstances, although it may be conditional for
future circumstances. That is to say, if the same or other causes, acting during subsequent
instants, do not change that propensity, & the point of space to which it ought to get
thereafter at the given instant of time, & which it actually does reach if these causes have
no other effect. Further, it is clear that we cannot have two such absolute states, arising
from all past & present circumstances, at the same time without prescribing replication ;
& this the conditional state arising from each of the component velocities does not induce
because of the very fact that it is conditional. If now there should be a jump from the
velocity, arising out of all the past & present circumstances, which, after one minute for
example, compels a point of space to move through 6 palms, to a velocity that compels the
point to move through 9 palms ; then, at the instant of time, in which the sudden change
takes place, there would be each of two absolute propensities in respect of all the circum-
stances of that instant & all that had gone before, existing simultaneously. For in the
whole of the preceding time there would have been a real series of states having the former
velocity as a term, & in the whole of the subsequent time there must be one having the
latter velocity as a term ; hence at that particular instant each of them must occur at one
& the same time, since neither real series can stand good without each having its own
real end term.

66. Again, it is at least possible that the actual velocity of a body, or of an existing At any instant an
point, may be nothing ; that is to say, if the motion is non-uniform. Now, this always ^^l *?££ ""**
is the case in Nature ; as I think can be proved, but it does not concern us at present. But, arising from a kind
at any rate, it is bound to have some potential velocity, or at least some state, which, °£yP°tentlal vel°-
although usually referred to by another name, & the velocity stated to be nothing, yet is

not definitely nothing, but is a real state, namely, a propensity for rest. I have come to
the conclusion, however, that in Nature there is not really such a thing as this state, or
absolute rest, from arguments that I gave in the Supplements to Stay's Philosophy in
two paragraphs concerning space & time ; & these I will add at the end of the work, amongst
some matters, that I will call by the name of supplements in this work as well ; they will
be placed first & second amongst them. But that idea also does not concern us at present.
Now, putting on one side these considerations altogether, it follows from the rest of what
I have said that, if we admit both uniform motion & rest as existing in Nature, or even
possible, then each velocity must have conditions that necessarily lead to the conclusion
that according to the argument given above in support of the Law of Continuity it has its
own corresponding force, & that no passage from one velocity to another can be made
except through intermediate stages.

67. Further, it is quite clear that from this it can be rigorously proved that the whole Rigorous proof that

e i . i . . . , 9 J r, . it is impossible to

velocity of a body cannot perish or arise in an instant of time, nor for a point that does pass from one veio-
not perish or arise along with it ; nor can our arguments with regard to production & city to a™*11?1 in

1-1 i r i • T-i • i.*«««°»«*» an instant of time.

destruction be made to refer to this. For, since that no velocity of a body, or of an
existing point, is not absolutely nothing, as I remarked, but is some real state ; & this real
state is bound to be connected with that other real state, namely, that of the prescribed
velocity that is being created or destroyed. Hence it comes about that there can be no
escape from the arguments I have given above, by saying that when the change from twelve
degrees of velocity is made to nine degrees, the first nine at least endure, whilst the
remaining three are destroyed ; & then by asserting that there is nothing absurd in this,
since neither in the duration of the former has there been any sudden change, nor is there
anything absurd in the jump caused by the destruction of the latter, according to the instance
of it given above, where it was shown that non-existence & existence must be disconnected.
For in the first place those twelve degrees of velocity are not something compounded of
twelve things distinct from, & unconnected with, one another, of which nine can endure
& three can be destroyed ; but are a single propensity for existing, after the lapse of any
given number of equal times of any given length, in points of space at a certain interval,
say twelve palms, away from the original position. So also, with regard to the ordinates
GD, HE, which in Fig. 6. express velocities, it is the fact that (most especially in my Theory)
the ordinate GD is not some part of the ordinate HE, common with it as far as the point
D ; but there are two ordinates, of which the first depends upon the relation of the distance
of the point D of the curve from the point G on the axis, & the second upon the relation
of the distance of point E on the curve from the point H on the axis, which is here the

74

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Relationem distantiae punctorum D, & G constituunt duo reales modi existendi ipsorum,
relationem distantias punctorum D. & E duo reales modi existendi ipsorum, & relationem
distantiae punctorum H, & E duo reales modi existendi ipsorum. Haec ultima relatio
constat duobus modis realibus tantummodo pertinentibus ad puncta E, & H, vel G, &
summa priorum constat modis realibus omnium trium, E, D, G. Sed nos indefinite con-
cipimus possibilitatem omnium modorum realium intermediorum, ut infra dicemus, in qua
praecisiva, & indefinita idea stat mini idea spatii continui ; & intermedii modi possibles inter
G, & D sunt pars intermediorum inter E, & H. Praeterea omissis etiam hisce omnibus ipse
ille saltus a velocitate finita ad nullam, vel a nulla ad finitam, haberi non potest.

Cur adhibita col- 68. Atque hinc ego quidem potuissem etiam adhibere duos globos asquales, qui sibi

eaiuicm^aKanTpro mv*cem occurrant cum velocitatibus sequalibus, quae nimirum in ipso contactu deberent

Thcoria deducenda. momento temporis intcrirc ; sed ut hasce ipsas considerationes evitarem de transitu a statu

reali ad statum itidem realem, ubi a velocitate aliqua transitur ad velocitatem nullam ;

adhibui potius [32] in omnibus dissertationibus meis globum, qui cum 12 velocitatis gradibus

assequatur alterum praecedentem cum 6 ; ut nimirum abeundo ad velocitatem aliam

quamcunque haberetur saltus ab una velocitate ad aliam, in quo evidentius esset absurdum.

Quo pacto mutata
velocitate poten-
tial! per saltum,
non mutetur per
saltum actualis.

69. Jam vero in hisce casibus utique haberi deberet saltus quidam, & violatio legis
continuitatis, non quidem in velocitate actuali, sed in potentiali, si ad contactum deveniretur
cum velocitatum discrimine aliquo determinato quocunque. In velocitate actuali, si earn
metiamur spatio, quod conficitur, diviso per tempus, transitus utique fieret per omnes
intermedias, quod sic facile ostenditur ope Geometriae. In fig. 10 designent AB, BC bina
tempora ante & post contactum, & momento quolibet H sit velocitas potentialis ilia major
HI, quae aequetur velocitati primae AD : quovis autem momento Q posterioris temporis sit

velocitas potentialis minor QR, quae aequetur
velocitati cuidam data: CG. Assumpto quovis
tempore HK determinatae magnitudinis, area
IHKL divisa per tempus HK, sive recta HI,
exhibebit velocitatem actualem. Moveatur
tempus HK versus B, & donee K adveniat ad
B, semper eadem habebitur velocitatis men-
sura ; eo autem progressoin O ultra B, sed adhuc
H existente in M citra B, spatium illi tem-
pori respondens componetur ex binis MNEB,
BFPO, quorum summa si dividatur per MO ;
jam nee erit MN aequalis priori AD, nee BF,
ipsa minor per datam quantitatem FE ; sed
facile demonstrari potest (&), capta VE asquali

D! ~ L V N E Y

Irrcgularitas alia
in cxpressione act-
ualis velocitatis.

\

"1

1

X

\

p; R T G

1

1

1

1

AH K

M B OQ S C

FIG. 10.

IL, vel HK, sive MO, & ducta recta VF, quae secet MN in X, quotum ex illo divisione
prodeuntem fore MX, donee, abeunte toto illo tempore ultra B in QS, jam area QRTS
divisa per tempus QS exhibeat velocitatem constantem QR.

70. Patet igitur in ea consideratione a velocitate actuali praecedente HI ad sequentem
QR transiri per omnes intermedias MX, quas continua recta VF definiet ; quanquam ibi
etiam irregulare quid oritur inde, quod velocitas actualis XM diversa obvenire debeat pro
diversa magnitudine temporis assumpti HK, quo nimirum assumpto majore, vel minore
removetur magis, vel minus V ab E, & decrescit, vel crescit XM. Id tamen accidit in
motibus omnibus, in quibus velocitas non manet eadem toto tempore, ut nimirum turn
etiam, si velocitas aliqua actualis debeat agnosci, & determinari spatio diviso per tempus ;
pro aliis, atque aliis temporibus assumptis pro mensura alias, atque alias velocitatis actualis
mensuras ob-[33]-veniant, secus ac accidit in motu semper aequabili, quam ipsam ob causam,
velocitatis actualis in motu difformi nulla est revera mensura accurata, quod supra innui
sed ejus idea praecisa, ac distincta aequabilitatem motus requirit, & idcirco Mechanic! in
difformibus motibus ad actualem velocitatem determinandam adhibere solent spatiolum
infinitesimo tempusculo percursum, in quo ipso motum habent pro aequabili.

(b) Si enim producatur OP usque ad NE in T, erit ET = VN, ob VE = MO =NT. Est autem

VE : VN : : EF : NX ; quart VN X EF = VE X NX, sive posito ET pro VN, W MO pro VE, erit
ET XEF =MO X NX. Totum MNTO est MO X MN, pars FETP est = EY X EF. Quafe residuus
gnomon NMOPFE est MOx(MN-NX), sive est MO X MX, quo diviso per MO babetur MX.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 75

same as the point G. The relation of the distance between the points D & G is determined
by the two real modes of existence peculiar to them, the relation of the distance between
the points D & E by the two real modes of existence peculiar to them, & the relation of
the distance between the points H & E by the two real modes of existence peculiar to them.
The last of these relations depends upon the two real modes of existence that pertain to the
points E & H (or G), & upon these alone ; the sum of the first & second depends upon all
three of the modes of the points E, D, & G. But we have some sort of ill-defined conception
of the possibility of all intermediate real modes of existence, as I will remark later ; & on
this disconnected & ill-defined idea is founded my conception of continuous space ; also
the possible intermediate modes between G & D form part of those intermediate between
E & H. Besides, omitting all considerations of this sort, -that sudden change from a finite
velocity to none at all, or from none to a finite, cannot happen.

68. Hence I might just as well have employed two equal balls, colliding with one why the collision
another with equal velocities, which in truth at the moment of contact would have to be thebsameTirecfion
destroyed in an instant of time. But, in order to avoid the very considerations just stated is employed for the
with regard to the passage from a real state to another real state (when we pass from a In "
definite velocity to none), I have preferred to employ in all my dissertations a ball having

1 2 degrees of velocity, which follows another ball going in front of it with 6 degrees ;
so that, by passing to some other velocity, there would be a sudden change from one
velocity to another ; & by this means the absurdity of the idea would be made more
evident.

69. Now, at least in such cases as these, there is bound to be some sudden change &

a breach of the Law of Continuity, not indeed in the actual velocity, but in the potential sudden change in
velocity, if the collision occurs with any given difference of velocities whatever. In the ^ ^^T^ might
actual velocity, measured by the space traversed divided by the time, the change will at any not 'be a sudden
rate be through all intermediate stages ; & this can easily be shown to be 50 by the aid of ^^veioclty16 ***"
Geometry.

In Fig. 10 let AB, BC represent two intervals of time, respectively before & after
contact ; & at any instant let the potential velocity be the greater velocity HI, equal to the .
first velocity AD ; & at any instant Q of the time subsequent to contact let the potential
velocity be the less velocity QR, equal to some given velocity CG. If any prescribed interval
of time HK be taken, the area IHKL divided by the time HK, i.e., the straight line HI,
will represent the actual velocity. Let the time HK be moved towards B ; then until
K comes to B, the measure of the velocity will always be the same. If then, K goes on
beyond B to O, whilst H still remains on the other side of B at M ; then the space corre-
sponding to that time will be composed of the two spaces MNEB, BFPO. Now, if the
sum of these is divided by MO, the result will not be equal to either MN (which is equal
to the first AD), or BF (which is less than MN by the given quantity FE). But it can
easily be proved ( ) that, if VE is taken equal to IL, or HK, or MO, & the straight line
VF is drawn to cut MN in X ; then the quotient obtained by the division will be MX.
This holds until, when the whole of the interval of time has passed beyond B into the
position QS, the area QRTS divided by the time QS now represents a constant velocity
equal to QR.

70. From the foregoing reasoning it is therefore clear that the change from the A further irregu-
preceding actual velocity HI to the subsequent velocity QR is made through all intermediate larity m the repre-

r , . . TV/TTT- i • i MI i i • i i i ••>•>• sentation of actual

velocities such as MX, which will be determined by the continuous straight line VF. There velocity,
is, however, some irregularity arising from the fact that the actual velocity XM must turn
out to be different for different magnitudes of the assumed interval of time HK. For,
according as this is taken to be greater or less, so the point V is removed to a greater or
less distance from E ; & thereby XM will be decreased or increased correspondingly. This
is the case, however, for all motions in which the velocity does not remain the same during
the whole interval ; as for instance in the case where, if any actual velocity has to be found
& determined by the quotient of the space traversed divided by the time taken, far other
& different measures of the actual velocities will arise to correspond with the different
intervals of time assumed for their measurement ; which is not the case for motions that
are always uniform. For this reason there is no really accurate measure of the actual
velocity in non-uniform motion, as I remarked above ; but a precise & distinct idea of it
requires uniformity of motion. Therefore Mechanicians in non-uniform motions, as a
means to the determination of actual velocity, usually employ the small space traversed in
an infinitesimal interval of time, & for this interval they consider that the motion is uniform.

(b) For if OP be produced to meet NE in T, then EY = VN ; for VE = MO = NT. Moreover

VE : VN=EF : NX ; and therefore VN.EF=VE.NX. Hence, replacing VN hy EY, and. VE hy MO, we have
EYEF=MO.NX. Now, the whole MNYO = MO.MN, and the part FEYP= ET.EF. Hence the remainder
(the gnomon NMOPFE) = MO.(MN — NX) = MO.MX .- and this, on division by MO, will give MX.

76 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

" \mmc yi- At velocitas potcntialis, quas singulis momentis temporis respondet sua, mutaretur

citatum non posse utique per saltum ipso momento B, quo deberet haberi & ultima velocitatum praecedentium
entianivciodtatumr" ^' ^ P"ma sequentium BF, quod cum haberi nequeat, uti demonstratum est, fieri non
potest per secundum ex argumentis, quae adhibuimus pro lege continuitatis, ut cum ilia
velocitatum inasqualitate deveniatur ad immediatum contactum ; atque id ipsum excludit
etiam inductio, quam pro lege continuitatis in ipsis quoque velocitatibus, atque motibus
primo loco proposui.

Prpmovenda ana- 72. Atque hoc demum pacto illud constitit evidenter, non licere continuitatis legem

deserere in collisione corporum, & illud admittere, ut ad contactum immediatum deveniatur
cum illaesis binorum corporum velocitatibus integris. Videndum igitur, quid necessario
consequi debeat, ubi id non admittatur, & haec analysis ulterius promovenda.

ifaberimu- 73' Quoniam a^ immediatum contactum devenire ea corpora non possunt cum praece-

tationem veiocita- dentibus velocitatibus ; oportet, ante contactum ipsum immediatum incipiant mutari
auk mutat Ue Vlm> velocitates ipsae, & vel ea consequentis corporis minui, vel ea antecedentis augeri, vel
utrumque simul. Quidquid accidat, habebitur ibi aliqua mutatio status, vel in altero
corpore, vel in utroque, in ordine ad motum, vel quietem, adeoque habebitur aliqua
mutationis causa, quaecunque ilia sit. Causa vero mutans statum corporis in ordine ad
motum, vel quietem, dicitur vis ; habebitur igitur vis aliqua, quae effectum gignat, etiam
ubi ilia duo corpora nondum ad contactum devenerint.

Earn vim debere 74. Ad impediendam violationem continuitatis satis esset, si ejusmodi vis ageret in

. iSf-SSi & alterum tantummodo e binis corporibus, reducendo praecedentis velocitatem ad gradus 12,

agere m panes op- . r. . ' .

positas. vel sequentis ad 6. Videndum igitur aliunde, an agere debeat in alterum tantummodo, an

in utrumque simul, & quomodo. Id determinabitur per aliam Naturae legem, quam nobis
inductio satis ampla ostendit, qua nimirum evincitur, omnes vires nobis cognitas agere
utrinque & aequaliter, & in partes oppositas, unde provenit principium, quod appellant
actionis, & reactionis aequalium ; est autem fortasse quaedam actio duplex semper aequaliter
agens in partes oppositas. Ferrum, & magnes aeque se mutuo trahunt ; elastrum binis
globis asqualibus interjectum aeque utrumque urget, & aequalibus velocitatibus propellit ;
gravitatem ipsam generalem mutuam esse osten-[34]-dunt errores Jovis, ac Saturni potissi-
mum, ubi ad se invicem accedunt, uti & curvatura orbitae lunaris orta ex ejus gravitate in
terram comparata cum aestu maris orto ex inaequali partium globi terraquei gravitate in
Lunam. Ipsas nostrae vires, quas nervorum ope exerimus, semper in partes oppositas agunt,
nee satis valide aliquid propellimus, nisi pede humum, vel etiam, ut efficacius agamus,
oppositum parietem simul repellamus. En igitur inductionem, quam utique ampliorem
etiam habere possumus, ex qua illud pro eo quoque casu debemus inferre, earn ibi vim in
utrumque corpus agere, quae actio ad aequalitatem non reducet inaequales illas velocitates,
nisi augeat praecedentis, minuat consequentis corporis velocitatem ; nimirum nisi in iis
producat velocitates quasdam contrarias, quibus, si solae essent, deberent a se invicem
recedere : sed quia eae componuntur cum praecedentibus ; hasc utique non recedunt, sed
tantummodo minus ad se invicem accedunt, quam accederent.

Hinc dicendam 75. Invenimus igitur vim ibi debere esse mutuam, quae ad partes oppositas agat, & quae

esse

sua natura determinet per sese ilia corpora ad recessum mutuum a se invicem. Hujusmodi

quaerendam ejus . . . . . ./„ . . 11 • • i • /~» j • i

legem. igitur vis ex nomims denmtione appellari potest vis repulsiva. Uuaerendum jam ulterius,

qua lege progredi debeat, an imminutis in immensum distantiis ad datam quandam mensuram
deveniat, an in infinitum excrescat ?

Ea vi debere totum 76. Ut in illo casu evitetur saltus ; satis est in allato exemplo ; si vis repulsiva, ad quam

crimenateHdi ante delati sumus, extinguat velocitatum differentiam illam 6 graduum, antequam ad contactum

contactum. immediatum corpora devenirent : quamobrem possent utique devenire ad eum contactum

eodem illo momento, quo ad aequalitatem velocitatum deveniunt. At si in alio quopiam

casu corpus sequens impellatur cum velocitatis gradibus 20, corpore praecedente cum suis 6 ;

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 77

71. The potential velocity, each corresponding to its own separate instant of time, The conclusion is

ij • f i j jj i ^.t i. • t • n a i • • tnat immediate

would certainly be changed suddenly at that instant ot time r> ; & at this point we are contact with a dif-

bound to have both the last of the preceding velocities, BE, & the first of the subsequent ference of velocities

velocities, BF. Now, since (as has been already proved) this is impossible, it follows from

the second of the arguments that I used to prove the Law of Continuity, that it cannot

come about that the bodies come into immediate contact with the inequality of velocities

in question. This is also excluded by induction, such as I gave in the first place for the

Law of Continuity, in the case also of these velocities & motions.

72. In this manner it is at length clearly established that it is not right to neglect the immediate contact
Law of Continuity in the collision of bodies, & admit the idea that they can come into ^Sysis^tobe ca^
immediate contact with the whole velocities of both bodies unaltered. Hence, we must ried further,
now investigate the consequences that necessarily follow when this idea is not admitted ;

& the analysis must be carried further.

73. Since the bodies cannot come into immediate contact with the velocities they had There must be then,
at first, it is necessary that those velocities should commence to change before that immediate change in the v'eioa
contact ; & either that of the body that follows should be diminished, or that of the one city '• & therefore
going in front should be increased, or that both these changes should take place together, causes the change!1
Whatever happens, there will be some change of state at the time, in one or other of the

bodies, or in both, with regard to motion or rest ; & so there must be some cause for this
change, whatever it is. But a cause that changes the state of a body as regards motion or
rest is called force. Hence there must be some force, which gives the effect, & that too
whilst the two bodies have not as yet come into contact.

74. It would be enough, to avoid a breach of the Law of Continuity, if a force of The f°rce omust V6

i • i.ii 11 r -I IT i i • i i • <• i i i • mutual, & act m

this kind should act on one of the two bodies only, altering the velocity of the body in opposite directions,
front to 12 degrees, or that of the one behind to 6 degrees. Hence we must find out,
from other considerations, whether it should act on one of the two bodies only, or on both
of them at the same time, & how. This point will be settled by another law of Nature,
which sufficiently copious induction brings before us ; that is, the law in which it is estab-
lished that all forces that are known to us act on both bodies, equally, and in opposite
directions. From this comes the principle that is called ' the principle of equal action
& reaction ' ; perchance this may be a sort of twofold action that always produces its
effect equally in opposite directions. Iron & a loadstone attract one another with the
same strength ; a spring introduced between two balls exerts an equal action on either
ball, & generates equal velocities in them. That universal gravity itself is mutual is proved
by the aberrations of Jupiter & of Saturn especially (not to mention anything else) ; that
is to say, the way in which they err from their orbits & approach one another mutually.
So also, when the curvature of the lunar orbit arising from its gravitation towards the
Earth is compared with the flow of the tides caused by the unequal gravitation towards
the Moon of different parts of the land & water that make up the Earth. Our own bodily
forces, which produce their effect by the help of our muscles, always act in opposite direc-
tions ; nor have we any power to set anything in motion, unless at the same time we press
upon the earth with our feet or, in order to get a better purchase, upon something that
will resist them, such as a wall opposite. Here then we have an induction, that can be
made indeed more ample still ; & from it we are bound in this case also to infer that the
force acts on each of the two bodies. This action will not reduce to equality those two
unequal velocities, unless it increases that of the body which is in front & diminishes that
of the one which follows. That is to say, unless it produces in them velocities that are
opposite in direction ; & with these velocities, if they alone existed, the bodies would
move away from one another. But, as they are compounded with those they had to start
with, the bodies do not indeed recede from one another, but only approach one another
less quickly than they otherwise would have done.

75. We have then found that the force must be a mutual force which acts in opposite Hence the force
directions ; one which from its very nature imparts to those bodies a natural propensity ™pu*sive*r ^"1^
for mutual recession from one another. Hence a force of this kind, from the very meaning governing it is now
of the term, may be called a repulsive force. We have now to go further & find the law to ^ found-
that it follows, & whether, when the distances are indefinitely diminished, it attains any

given measure, or whether it increases indefinitely.

76. In this case, in order that any sudden change may be avoided, it is sufficient, in The whole differ-
the example under consideration, if the repulsive force, to which our arguments have led veiocitiesWmust *be
us, should destroy that difference of 6 degrees in the velocities before the bodies should destroyed by the
have come into immediate contact. Hence they might possibly at least come into contact t°^e

at the instant in which they attained equality between the velocities. But if in another
case, say, the body that was behind were moving with 20 degrees of velocity, whilst the

78 PHILOSOPHL/E NATURALIS THEORIA

turn vero ad contactum deveniretur cum differentia velocitatum majore, quam graduum 8.
Nam illud itidem amplissima inductione evincitur, vires omnes nobis cognitas, quas aliquo
tempore agunt, ut velocitatem producant, agere in ratione temporis, quo agunt, & sui
ipsius. Rem in gravibus oblique descendentibus experimenta confirmant ; eadem & in
elastris institui facile possunt, ut rem comprobent ; ac id ipsum est fundamentum totius
Mechanicae, quae inde motuum leges eruit, quas experimenta in pendulis, in projectis
gravibus, in aliis pluribus comprobant, & Astronomia confirmat in caelestibus motibus.
Quamobrem ilia vis repulsiva, quae in priore casu extinxit 6 tantummodo gradus discriminis,
si agat breviore tempore in secundo casu, non poterit extinguere nisi pauciores, minore
nimirum velocitate producta utrinque ad partes contrarias. At breviore utique tempore
aget : nam cum majore velocitatum discrimine velocitas respectiva est major, ac proinde
accessus celerior. [35] Extingueret igitur in secundo casu ilia vis minus, quam 6 discriminis
gradus, si in primo usque ad contactum extinxit tantummodo 6. Superessent igitur plures,
quam 8 ; nam inter 20 & 6 erant 14, ubi ad ipsum deveniretur contactum, & ibi per saltum
deberent velocitates mutari, ne compenetratio haberetur, ac proinde lex continuitatis
violari. Cum igitur id accidere non possit ; oportet, Natura incommodo caverit per
ejusmodi vim, quae in priore casu aliquanto ante contactum extinxerit velocitatis discrimen,
ut nimirum imminutis in secundo casu adhuc magis distantiis, vis ulterior illud omne
discrimen auferat, elisis omnibus illis 14 gradibus discriminis, qui habebantur.

Earn vim debere
augeri in infinitum,
imminutis, & qui-
dem in infinitum,
distantiis : habente
virium curva ali-
quam asymptotum
in origine abscissa-
rum.

77. Quando autem hue jam delati sumus, facile est ulterius progredi, & illud con-
siderare, quod in secundo casu accidit respectu primi, idem accidere aucta semper velocitate
consequentis corporis in tertio aliquo respectu secundi, & ita porro. Debebit igitur ad
omnem pro omni casu evitandum saltum Natura cavisse per ejusmodi vim, quae imminutis
distantiis crescat in infinitum, atque ita crescat, ut par sit extinguendas cuicunque velocitati,
utcunque magnae. Devenimus igitur ad vires repulsivas imminutis distantiis crescentes
in infinitum, nimirum ad arcum ilium asymptoticum ED curae virium in fig. i propositum.
Illud quidem ratiocinatione hactenus instituta immediate non deducitur, hujusmodi
incrementa virium auctarum in infinitum respondere distantiis in infinitum imminutis.
Posset pro hisce corporibus, quae habemus prae manibus, quasdam data distantia quascunque
esse ultimus limes virium in infinitum excrescentium, quo casu asymptotus AB non transiret
per initium distantiae binorum corporum, sed tanto intervallo post ipsum, quantus esset
ille omnium distantiarum, quas remotiores particulse possint acquirere a se invicem, limes
minimus ; sed aliquem demum esse debere extremum etiam asymptoticum arcum curvas
habentem pro asymptote rectam transeuntem per ipsum initium distantiae, sic evincitur ;
si nullus ejusmodi haberetur arcus ; particulae materiae minores, & primo collocatae in
distantia minore, quam esset ille ultimus limes, sive ilia distantia asymptoti ab initio
distantias binorum punctorum materiae, in mutuis incursibus velocitatem deberent posse
mutare per saltum, quod cum fieri nequeat, debet utique aliquis esse ultimus asymptoticus
arcus, qui asymptotum habeat transeuntem per distantiarum initium, & vires inducat
imminutis in infinitum distantiis crescentes in infinitum ita, ut sint pares velocitati extin-
guendae cuivis, utcunque magnae. Ad summum in curva virium haberi possent plures
asymptotici arcus, alii post alios, habentes ad exigua intervalla asymptotes inter se parallelas,
qui casus itidem uberrimum aperit contemplationibus fcecundissimis campum, de quo
aliquid inferius ; sed aliquis arcus asympto-[36]-ticus postremus, cujusmodi est is, quern
in figura i proposui, haberi omnino debet. Verum ea perquisitione hie omissa, pergendum
est in consideratione legis virium, & curvae earn exprimentis, quae habentur auctis distantiis.

vim in majoribus
tractfvam, ^

78. In primis gravitas omnium corporum in Terram, quam quotidie experimur, satis
, evmcit> repulsionem illam, quam pro minimis distantiis invenimus, non extendi ad distantias

secante axem in quascunque, sed in magnis jam distantiis haberi determinationem ad accessum, quam vim
aliquo hmite. attractivam nominavimus. Quin immo Keplerianae leges in Astronomia tarn feliciter a

Newtono adhibitae ad legem gravitatis generalis deducendam, & ad cometas etiam traductas,

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

79

I?
3

0

O

8o

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

o

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 81

body in front still had its' original 6 degrees ; then they would come into contact with
a difference of velocity greater than 8 degrees. For, it can also be proved by the fullest
possible induction that all forces known to us, which act for any intervals of time so as to
produce velocity, give effects that are proportional to the times for which they act, & also
to the magnitudes of the forces themselves. This is confirmed by experiments with heavy
bodies descending obliquely ; the same things can be easily established in the case of springs
so as to afford corroboration. Moreover it is the fundamental theorem of the whole of
Mechanics, & from it are derived the laws of motion ; these are confirmed by experiments
with pendulums, projected weights, & many other things ; they are corroborated also by
astronomy in the matter of the motions of the heavenly bodies. Hence the repulsive force,
which in the first case destroyed only 6 degrees difference of velocity, if it acts for a shorter
time in the second case, will not be able to destroy aught but a less number of degrees, as
the velocity produced in the two bodies in opposite directions is less. Now it certainly
will act for a shorter time ; for, owing to the greater difference of velocities, the relative
velocity is greater & therefore the approach is faster. Hence, in the second case the force
would destroy less than 6 degrees of the difference, if in the first case it had, just at contact,
destroyed 6 degrees only. There would therefore be more than 8 degrees left over (for,
between 20 & 6 there are 14) when contact happened, & then the velocities would have
to be changed suddenly unless there was compenetration ; & thereby the Law of Continuity
would be violated. Since, then, this cannot be the case, Nature would be sure to guard
against this trouble by a force of such a kind as that which, in the former case, extinguished
the difference of velocity some time before contact ; that is to say, so that, when the
distances are still further diminished in the second case, a further force eliminates all
that difference, all of the 14 degrees of difference that there were originally being
destroyed.

77. Now, after that we have been led so far, it is easy to go on further still & to consider 'nie fon:e mus* "*•
that, what happens in the second case when compared with the first, will happen also in SThe distances Ire
a third case, in which the velocity of the body that follows is once more increased, when diminished, also
compared with the second case ; & so on, & so on. Hence, in order to guard against any Sn-ve"^*6 forces has

sudden change at all in every case whatever, Nature will necessarily have taken measures an asymptote at the

for this purpose by means of a force of such a kind that, as the distances are diminished the ongm

force increases indefinitely, & in such a manner that it is capable of destroying any velocity,

however great it may be. We have arrived therefore at repulsive forces that increase as

the distances diminish, & increase indefinitely ; that is to say, to the asymptotic arc, ED,

of the curve of forces exhibited in Fig. i . It is indeed true that by the reasoning given so

far it is not immediately deduced that increments of the forces when increased to infinity

correspond with the distances diminished to infinity. There may be for these bodies,

such as we have in consideration, some fixed distance that acts as a boundary limit to forces

that increase indefinitely ; in this case the asymptote AB will not pass through the

beginning of the distance between the two bodies, but at an interval after it as great as the

least limit of all distances that particles, originally more remote, might acquire from one

another. But, that there is some final asymptotic arc of the curve having for its asymptote

the straight line passing through the very beginning of the distance, is proved as follows.

If there were no arc of this kind, then the smaller particles of matter, originally collected

at a distance less than this final limit would be, i.e., less than the distance of the asymptote

from the beginning of the distance between the two points of matter, must be capable of

having- their velocities, on collision with one another, suddenly changed. Now, as this is

impossible, then at any rate there must be some asymptotic arc, which has an asymptote

passing through the very beginning of the distances ; & this leads us to forces that, as the

distances are indefinitely diminished, increase indefinitely in such a way that they are

capable of destroying any velocity, no matter how large it may be. In general, in a curve

of forces there may be several asymptotic arcs, one after the other, having at short intervals

asymptotes parallel to one another ; & this case also opens up a very rich field for fruitful

investigations, about which I will say something later. But there must certainly be some

one final asymptotic arc of the kind that I have given in Fig. i. However, putting

this investigation on one side, we must get on with the consideration of the law

of forces, & the curve that represents them, which are obtained when the distances

are increased.

78. First of all, the gravitation of all bodies towards the Earth, which is an everyday The force at greater
experience, proves sufficiently that the repulsion that we found for very small distances fv^he^curve^cut-
does not extend to all distances ; but that at distances that are now great there is a ting the axis at
propensity for approach, which we have called an attractive force. Moreover the Keplerian s
Laws in astronomy, so skilfully employed by Newton to deduce the law of universal
gravitation, & applied even to the comets, show perfectly well that gravitation extends,

82 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

satis ostendunt, gravitatem vel in infinitum, vel saltern per totum planetarium, & come-
tarium systema extendi in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum. Quamobrem virium
curva arcum habet aliquem jacentem ad partes axis oppositas, qui accedat, quantum sensu
percipi possit, ad earn tertii gradus hyperbolam, cujus ordinatae sunt in ratione reciproca
duplicata distantiarum, qui nimirum est ille arcus STV figuras I. Ac illud etiam hinc
patet, esse aliquem locum E, in quo curva ejusmodi axem secet, qui sit limes attractionum,
& repulsionum, in quo ab una ad alteram ex iis viribus transitus fiat.

Plures esse debere, 79. Duos alios nobis indicat limites ejusmodi, sive alias duas intersectiones, ut G & I,

linStes3 Pn3enomenum vaporum, qui oriuntur ex aqua, & aeris, qui a fixis corporibus gignitur ;
cum in iis ante nulla particularum repulsio fuerit, quin immo fuerit attractio, ob
cohaerentiam, qua, una parte retracta, altera ipsam consequebatur, & in ilia tanta expansione,
& elasticitatis vi satis se manifesto prodat repulsio, ut idcirco a repulsione in minimis distantiis
ad attractionem alicubi sit itum, turn inde iterum ad repulsionem, & iterum inde ad generalis
gravitatis attractiones. Effervescentiae, & fermentationes adeo diversae, in quibus cum
adeo diversis velocitatibus eunt, ac redeunt, & jam ad se invicem accedunt, jam recedunt
a se invicem particulae, indicant utique ejusmodi limites, atque transitus multo plures ;
sed illos prorsus evincunt substantise molles, ut cera, in quibus compressiones plurimse
acquiruntur cum distantiis admodum adversis, in quibus, tamen omnibus limites haberi
debent ; nam, anteriore parte ad se attracta, posteriores earn sequuntur, eadem propulsa,
illae recedunt, distantiis ad sensum non mutatis, quod ob illas repulsiones in minimis
distantiis, quae contiguitatem impediunt, fieri alio modo non potest, nisi si limites ibidem
habeantur in iis omnibus distantiis inter attractiones, & repulsiones, quae nimirum requi-
runtur ad hoc, ut pars altera alteram consequatur retractam, vel prsecedat propulsam.

Hinc tota curvae 80. Habentur igitur plurimi limites, & plurimi flexus curvse hinc, & inde ab axe prseter

a°yroptotLm& bTu- ^uos arcus> quorum prior ED in infinitum protenditur, & asymptoticus est, alter STV,
ribus flexibus, ac [37] si gravitas generalis in infinitum protenditur, est asymptoticus itidem, & ita accedit
ad crus illud hyperbolae gradus tertii, ut discrimen sensu percipi nequeat : nam cum ipso
penitus congruere omnino non potest ; non enim posset ab eodem deinde discedere, cum
duarum curvarum, quarum diversa natura est, nulli arcus continui, utcunque exigui, possint
penitus congruere, sed se tantummodo secare, contingere, osculari possint in punctis
quotcunque, & ad se invicem accedere utcumque. Hinc habetur jam tota forma curvae
virium, qualem initio proposui, directa ratiocinatione a Naturae phsenomenis, & genuinis
principiis deducta. Remanet jam determinanda constitutio primorum elementorum
materiae ab iis viribus deducta, quo facto omnis ilia Theoria, quam initio proposui, patebit,
nee erit arbitraria quaedam hypothesis, ac licebit progredi ad amovendas apparentes quasdam
difHcultates, & ad uberrimam applicationem ad omnem late Physicam qua exponendam,
qua tantummodo, ne hoc opus plus aequo excrescat, indicandam.

Hinc elementorum 81. Quoniam, imminutis in infinitum distantiis, vis repulsiva augetur in infinitum ;

m facile patet, nullam partem materias posse esse contiguam alteri parti : vis enim ilia repulsiva

carens

partibus. protinus alteram ab altera removeret. Quamobrem necessario inde consequitur, prima

materiae elementa esse omnino simplicia, & a nullis contiguis partibus composita. Id
quidem immediate, & necessario fluit ex ilia constitutione virium, quae in minimis distantiis
sunt repulsivae, & in infinitum excrescunt.

Soiutio objectionis 82. Objicit hie fortasse quispiam illud, fieri posse, ut particulae primigenias materias

petitaeex eo quod sjnt compOsitae quidem, sed nulla Naturae vi divisibiles a se invicem, quarum altera tota

vires repulsivas r. . ^ . .... . . . ,. .. i • i

habere possent non respectu altenus totius habeat vires illas in minimis distantiis repulsivas, vel quarum pars
puncta smguia, se qu3evis respectu reliquarum partium eiusdem particulae non solum nullam habeat repulsivam

particulae primi- T-. 1,1 '-.,, J.r ,. ,.,. r . .

geniae. vim, sed habeat maximam illam attractivam, qua; ad ejusmodi cohaesionem requintur :

eo pacto evitari debere quemvis immediatum impulsum, adeoque omnem saltum, & con-
tinuitatis laesionem. At in primis id esset contra homogeneitatem materiae, de qua agemus
infra : nam eadem materiae pars in iisdem distantiis respectu quarundam paucissimarum
partium, cum quibus particulam suam componit, haberet vim repulsivam, respectu autem

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 83

either to infinity or at least to the limits of the system including all the planets & comets,
in the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances. Hence the curve will have an arc
lying on the opposite side of the axis, which, as far as can be perceived by our senses,
approximates to that hyperbola of the third degree, of which the ordinates are in the inverse
ratio of the squares of the distances ; & this indeed is the arc STV in Fig. i. Now from
this it is evident that there is some point E, in which a curve of this kind cuts the axis ;
and this is a limit-point for attractions and repulsions, at which the passage from one to
the other of these forces is made.

79. The phenomenon of vapour arising from water, & that of gas produced from There are bound to
fixed bodies lead us to admit two more of these limit-points, i.e., two other intersections, ^Syof'tiSep^
say, at G & I. Since in these there would be initially no repulsion, nay rather there sages, with corre-
would be an attraction due to cohesion, by which, when one part is retracted, another 1"6 hmit
generally followed it : & since in the former, repulsion is clearly evidenced by the

greatness of the expansion, & by the force of its elasticity ; it therefore follows that
there is, somewhere or other, a passage from repulsion at very small distances to attraction,
then back again to repulsion, & from that back once more to the attractions of universal
gravitation. Effervescences & fermentations of many different kinds, in which the
particles go & return with as many different velocities, & now approach towards &
now recede from one another, certainly indicate many more of these limit-points &
transitions. But the existence of these limit-points is perfectly proved by the case of
soft substances like wax ; for in these substances a large number of compressions are acquired
with very different distances, yet in all of these there must be limit-points. For, if the
front part is drawn out, the part behind will follow ; or if the former is pushed inwards,
the latter will recede from it, the distances remaining approximately unchanged. This, on
account of the repulsions existing at very small distances, which prevent contiguity, can-
not take place in any way, unless there are limit-points there in all those distances between
attractions & repulsions ; namely, those that are requisite to account for the fact that one
part will follow the other when the latter is drawn out, & will recede in front of the
latter when that is pushed in.

80. Therefore there are a large number of limit-points, & a large number of flexures Hence we get the
on the curve, first on one side & then on the other side of the axis, in addition to two whole for™hof t^e
arcs, one of which, ED, is continued to infinity & is asymptotic, & the other, STV, is asymptotes, many
asymptotic also, provided that universal gravitation extends to infinity. It approximates flexures & many

J ir j- r i i r i i • i i -11 111 i intersections with

to the form of the hyperbola of the third degree mentioned above so closely that the the axis,
difference from it is imperceptible ; but it cannot altogether coincide with it, because, in
that case it would never depart from it. For, of two curves of different nature, there
cannot be any continuous arcs, no matter how short, that absolutely coincide ; they can
only cut, or touch, or osculate one another in an indefinitely great number of points, &
approximate to one another indefinitely closely. Thus we now have the whole form of
the curve of forces, of the nature that I gave at the commencement, derived by a straight-
forward chain of reasoning from natural phenomena, & sound principles. It only remains
for us now to determine the constitution of the primary elements of matter, derived from
these forces ; £: in this manner the whole of the Theory that I enunciated at the start
will become quite clear, & it will not appear to be a mere arbitrary hypothesis. We
can proceed to remove certain apparent difficulties, & to apply it with great profit to
the whole of Physics in general, explaining some things fully &, to prevent the work
from growing to an unreasonable size, merely mentioning others.

81. Now, because the repulsive force is indefinitely increased when the distances are The simplicity of
indefinitely diminished, it is quite easy to see clearly that no part of matter can be contiguous ments^oT^att^r "
to any other part ; for the repulsive force would at once separate one from the other, they are altogether
Therefore it necessarily follows that the primary elements of matter are perfectly simple, w^110"* Parts.

& that they are not composed of any parts contiguous to one another. This is an
immediate & necessary deduction from the constitution of the forces, which are repulsive
at very small distances & increase indefinitely.

82. Perhaps someone will here raise the objection that it may be that the primary Solution of the ob-
particles of matter are composite, but that they cannot be disintegrated by any force in jnetlo^SSertiond that
Nature; that one whole with regard to another whole may possibly have those forces single points can-
that are repulsive at very small distances, whilst any one part with regard to any other part ?OTces,a™u7Pt h'at
of the same particle may not only have no repulsive force, but indeed may have a very primary particles
great attractive force such as is required for cohesion of this sort ; that, in this way, we can have them-
are bound to avoid all immediate impulse, & so any sudden change or breach of continuity.

But, in the first place, this would be in opposition to the homogeneity of matter, which
we will consider later ; for the same part of matter, at the same distances with regard to
those very few parts, along with which it makes up the particle, would have a repulsive

84

PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

aliarum omnium attractivam in iisdem distantiis, quod analogic adversatur. Deinde si a
Deo agente supra vires Naturae sejungerentur illas partes a se invicem, turn ipsius Naturae
vi in se invicem incurrerent ; haberetur in earum collisione saltus naturalis, utut praesup-
ponens aliquid factum vi agente supra Naturam. Demum duo turn cohaesionum genera
deberent haberi in Natura admodum diversa, alterum per attractionem in minimis distantiis,
alterum vero longe alio pacto in elementarium particularum massis, nimirum per limites
cohaesionis ; adeoque multo minus simplex, & minus uniformis evaderet Theoria.

An elementa sint [38]
extensa : argumen-
ta pro virtual! eor-
um extensione.

83. Simplicitate & incompositione elementorum defmita, dubitari potest, an ea
sint etiam inextensa, an aliquam, utut simplicia, extensionem habeant ejus generis, quam
virtualem extensionem appellant Scholastici. Fuerunt enim potissimum inter Peripateticos,
qui admiserint elementa simplicia, & carentia partibus, atque ex ipsa natura sua prorsus
indivisibilia, sed tamen extensa per spatium divisibile ita, ut alia aliis ma jus etiam occupent
spatium, ac eo loco, quo unum stet, possint, eo remote, stare simul duo, vel etiam plura ;
ac sunt etiamnum, qui ita sentiant. Sic etiam animam rationalem hominis utique prorsus
indivisibilem censuerunt alii per totum corpus diffusam : alii minori quidem corporis parti,
sed utique parti divisibili cuipiam, & extensae, praesentem toti etiamnum arbitrantur.
Deum autem ipsum praesentem ubique credimus per totum utique divisibile spatium,
quod omnia corpora occupant, licet ipse simplicissimus sit, nee ullam prorsus compositionem
admittat. Videtur autem sententia eadem inniti cuidam etiam analogiae loci, ac temporis.
Ut enim quies est conjunctio ejusdem puncti loci cum serie continua omnium moment-
orum ejus temporis, quo quies durat : sic etiam ilia virtualis extensio est conjunctio unius
momenti temporis cum serie continua omnium punctorum spatii, per quod simplex illud
ens virtualiter extenditur ; ut idcirco sicut ilia quies haberi creditur in Natura, ita & haec
virtualis extensio debeat admitti, qua admissa poterunt utique ilia primse materiae elementa
esse simplicia, & tamen non penitus inextensa.

Exciuditur virtu-

rite appiicato.

84. At ego quidem arbitror, hanc itidem sententiam everti penitus eodem inductionis
principio, ex quo alia tarn multa hucusque, quibus usi sumus, deduximus. Videmus enim
in his corporibus omnibus, quae observare possumus, quidquid distinctum occupat locum,
distinctum esse itidem ita, ut etiam satis magnis viribus adhibitis separari possint, quae
diversas occupant spatii partes, nee ullum casum deprehendimus, in quo magna haec corpora
partem aliquam habeant, quae eodem tempore diversas spatii partes occupet, & eadem
sit. Porro haec proprietas ex natura sua ejus generis est, ut aeque cadere possit in
magnitudines, quas per sensum deprehendimus, ac in magnitudines, quae infra sensuum
nostrorum limites sunt ; res nimirum pendet tantummodo a magnitudine spatii, per quod
haberetur virtualis extensio, quae magnitudo si esset satis ampla, sub sensus caderet. Cum
igitur nunquam id comperiamus in magnitudinibus sub sensum cadentibus, immo in
casibus innumeris deprehendamus oppositum : debet utique res transferri ex inductionis
principio supra exposito ad minimas etiam quasque materiae particulas, ut ne illae quidem
ejusmodi habeant virtualem extensionem.

Responsioadexem- [39] 85. Exempla, quae adduntur, petita ab anima rational}, & ab omnipraesentia
plum anima & Dei. j)ej} nj^ positive evincunt, cum ex alio entium genere petita sint ; praeterquam quod nee
illud demonstrari posse censeo, animam rationalem non esse unico tantummodo, simplici,
& inextenso corporis puncto ita praesentem, ut eundem locum obtineat, exerendo inde
vires quasdam in reliqua corporis puncta rite disposita, in quibus viribus partim necessariis,
& partim liberis, stet ipsum animae commercium cum corpore. Dei autem praesentia
cujusmodi sit, ignoramus omnino ; quem sane extensum per spatium divisibile nequaquam
dicimus, nee ab iis modis omnem excedentibus humanum captum, quibus ille existit,
cogitat, vult, agit, ad humanos, ad materiales existendi, agendique modos, ulla esse potest
analogia, & deductio.

itidem ad analo- 86. Quod autem pertinet ad analogiam cum quiete, sunt sane satis valida argumenta,

giam cum quiete. quibus, ut supra innui, ego censeam, in Natura quietem nullam existere. Ipsam nee posse

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 85

»

force ; but it would have an attractive force with regard to all others, at the very same
distances ; & this is in opposition to analogy. Secondly, if, due to the action of GOD
surpassing the forces of Nature, those parts are separated from one another, then urged
by the forces of Nature they would rush towards one another ; & we should have, from
their collision, a sudden change appertaining to Nature, although conveying a presumption
that something was done by the action of a supernatural force. Lastly, with this idea,
there would have to be two kinds of cohesion in Nature that were altogether different in
constitution ; one due to attraction at very small distances, & the other coming about
in a far different way in the case of masses of elementary particles, that is to say, due to
the limit-points of cohesion. Thus a theory would result that is far less simple & less
uniform than mine.

83. Taking it for granted, then, that the elements are simple & non-composite, whether the ele-
there can be no doubt as to whether they are also non-extended or whether, although ments are extended;

, , , , .' , 1-1 • i V certain arguments

simple, they have an extension of the kind that is termed virtual extension by the m favour of virtual

Scholastics. For there were some, especially among the Peripatetics, who admitted elements extension.

that were simple, lacking in all parts, & from their very nature perfectly indivisible ;

but, for all that, so extended through divisible space that some occupied more room than

others ; & such that in the position once occupied by one of them, if that one were

removed, two or even more others might be placed at the same time ; & even now there

are some who are of the same opinion. So also some thought that the rational soul in

man, which certainly is altogether indivisible, was diffused throughout the whole of the

body ; whilst others still consider that it is present throughout the whole of, indeed, a

smaller part of the body, but yet a part that is at any rate divisible & extended.

Further we believe that GOD Himself is present everywhere throughout the whole of the

undoubtedly divisible space that all bodies occupy ; & yet He is onefold in the highest

degree & admits not of any composite nature whatever. Moreover, the same idea seems

to depend on an analogy between space & time. For, just as rest is a conjunction with

a continuous series of all the instants in the interval of time during which the rest endures ;

so also this virtual extension is a conjunction of one instant of time with a continuous series

of all the points of space throughout which this one-fold entity extends virtually. Hence,

just as rest is believed to exist in Nature, so also are we bound to admit virtual extension ;

& if this is admitted, then it will be possible for the primary elements of matter to be

simple, & yet not absolutely non-extended.

84. But I have come to the conclusion that this idea is quite overthrown by that same virtual extension
principle of induction, by which we have hitherto deduced so many results which we have isr .excluded^ by the
employed. For we see, in all those bodies that we can bring under observation, that auction6 correctly
whatever occupies a distinct position is itself also a distinct thing ; so that those that occupy aPPlied-
different parts of space can be separated by using a sufficiently large force ; nor can we

detect a case in which these larger bodies have any part that occupies different parts of
space at one & the same time, & yet is the same part. Further, this property by its very
nature is of the sort for which it is equally probable that it happens in magnitudes that we can
detect by the senses & in magnitudes which are below the limits of our senses. In fact,
the matter depends only upon the size of the space, throughout which the virtual extension
is supposed to exist ; & this size, if it were sufficiently ample, would become sensible
to us. Since then we never find this virtual extension in magnitudes that fall within the
range of our senses, nay rather, in innumerable cases we perceive the contrary ; the matter
certainly ought to be transferred by the principle of induction, as explained above, to
any of the smallest particles of matter as well ; so that not even they are admitted to have
such virtual extension.

85. The illustrations that are added, derived from a consideration of the rational Reply to the
soul & the omnipresence of GOD, prove nothing positively ; for they are derived from s^uf&'cot)6 '
another class of entities, except that, I do not think that it can even be proved that the

rational soul does not exist in merely a single, simple, & non-extended point of the body ;
so that it maintains the same position, & thence it puts forth some sort of force into the
remaining points of the body duly disposed about it ; & the intercommunication between
the soul & the body consists of these forces, some of which are involuntary whilst others
are voluntary. Further, we are absolutely ignorant of the nature of the presence of GOD ;
& in no wise do we say that He is really extended throughout divisible space ; nor from
those modes, surpassing all human intelligence, by which HE exists, thinks, wills & acts,
can any analogy or deduction be made which will apply to human or material modes of
existence & action.

86. Again, as regards the analogy with rest, we have arguments that are sufficiently Again with regard

IT T i j i i i_ • t ^v • vr .. ' to the analogy with

strong to lead us to believe, as I remarked above, that there is no such thing m Nature rest.
as absolute rest. Indeed, I proved that such a thing could not be, by a direct argument

86 PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

existere, argumento quodam positive ex numero combinationum possibilium infinite
contra alium finitum, demonstravi in Stayanis Supplementis, ubi de spatio, & tempore
quae juxta num. 66 occurrent infra Supplementorum § i, & § 2 ; numquam vero earn
existere in Natura, patet sane in ipsa Newtoniana sententia de gravitate generali, in qua in
planetario systemate ex mutuis actionibus quiescit tantummodo centrum commune gravi-
tatis, punctum utique imaginarium, circa quod omnia planetarum, cometarumque corpora
moventur, ut & ipse Sol ; ac idem accidit fixis omnibus circa suorum systematum gravitatis
centra ; quin immo ex actione unius systematis in aliud utcunque distans, in ipsa gravitatis
centra motus aliquis inducetur ; & generalius, dum movetur quaecunque materiae particula,
uti luminis particula qusecunque ; reliquae omnes utcunque remotae, quas inde positionem
ab ilia mutant, mutant & gravitatem, ac proinde moventur motu aliquo exiguo, sed sane
motu. In ipsa Telluris quiescentis sententia, quiescit quidem Tellus ad sensum, nee tota
ab uno in alium transfertur locum ; at ad quamcunque crispationem maris, rivuli decursum,
muscae volatum, asquilibrio dempto, trepidatio oritur, perquam exigua ilia quidem, sed
ejusmodi, ut veram quietem omnino impediat. Quamobrem analogia inde petita evertit
potius virtualem ejusmodi simplicium elementorum extensionem positam in conjunctione
ejusdem momenti temporis cum serie continua punctorum loci, quam comprobet.

in quo deficiat ana- 87. Sed nee ea ipsa analogia, si adesset, rem satis evinceret ; cum analogiam inter tempus,

logia loci, & tem- £ locum videamus in aliis etiam violari : nam in iis itidem paragraphis Supplementorum
demonstravi, nullum materiae punctum unquam redire ad punctum spatii quodcunque,
in quo semel fuerit aliud materiae punctum, ut idcirco duo puncta materiae nunquam
conjungant idem [40] punctum spatii ne cum binis quidem punctis temporis, dum quam-
plurima binaria punctorum materiae conjungunt idem punctum temporis cum duobus
punctis loci ; nam utique coexistunt : ac praeterea tempus quidem unicam dimensionem
habet diuturnitatis, spatium vero habet triplicem, in longum, latum, atque profundum.

inextensio utilis 88. Quamobrem illud jam tuto inferri potest, haec primigenia materiae elementa, non

ad exciudendum soium esse simplicia, ac indivisibilia, sed etiam inextensa. Et quidem haec ipsa simplicitas,

transitum momen- , t ; . i • «i_ j ji_

taneum a densitate & inextensio elementorum praestabit commoda sane plunma, quibus eadem adnuc magis
nuiia ad summam. fuicitur, ac comprobatur. Si enim prima elementa materiae sint quaedam partes solidse,
ex partibus compositae, vel etiam tantummodo extensae virtualiter, dum a vacuo spatio
motu continue pergitur per unam ejusmodi particulam, fit saltus quidam momentaneus
a densitate nulla, quae habetur in vacuo, ad densitatem summam, quae habetur, ubi ea
particula spatium occupat totum. Is vero saltus non habetur, si elementa simplicia sint,
& inextensa, ac a se invicem distantia. Turn enim omne continuum est vacuum tantum-
modo, & in motu continue per punctum simplex fit transitus a vacuo continue ad vacuum
continuum. Punctum illud materiae occupat unicum spatii punctum, quod punctum
spatii est indivisibilis limes inter spatium praecedens, & consequens. Per ipsum non
immoratur mobile continue motu delatum, nee ad ipsum transit ab ullo ipsi immediate
proximo spatii puncto, cum punctum puncto proximum, uti supra diximus, nullum sit ;
sed a vacuo continue ad vacuum continuum transitur per ipsum spatii punctum a materiae
puncto occupatum.

itidem ad hoc, ut go,. Accedit, quod in sententia solidorum, extensorumque elementorum habetur illud,

possit, ut p"test densitatem corporis minui posse in infinitum, augeri autem non posse, nisi ad certum limitem
minui in infinitum. in quo increment! lex necessario abrumpi debeat. Primum constat ex eo, quod eadem
particula continua dividi possit in particulas minores quotcunque, quae idcirco per spatium
utcunque magnum diffundi potest ita, ut nulla earum sit, quae aliquam aliam non habeat
utcunque libuerit parum a se distantem. Atque eo pacto aucta mole, per quam
eadem ilia massa diffusa sit, eaque aucta in ratione quacunque minuetur utique
densitas in ratione itidem utcunque magna. Patet & alterum : ubi enim omnes
particulae ad contactum devenerint ; densitas ultra augeri non poterit. Quoniam
autem determinata quaedam erit utique ratio spatii vacui ad plenum, nonnisi in ea ratione
augeri poterit densitas, cujus augmentum, ubi ad contactum deventum fuerit, adrumpetur.
At si elementa sint puncta penitus indivisibilia, & inextensa ; uti augeri eorum distantia
poterit in infinitum, ita utique poterit etiam minui pariter in ratione quacunque ; cum

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 87

founded upon the infiniteness of a number of possible combinations as against the finiteness
of another number, in the Supplements to Stay's Philosophy, in connection with space
& time ; these will be found later immediately after Art. 14 of the Supplements, §§ I
and II. That it never does exist in Nature is really clear in the Newtonian theory of
universal gravitation ; according to this theory, in the planetary system the common centre
of gravity alone is at rest under the action of the mutual forces ; & this is an altogether
imaginary point, about which all the bodies of the planets & comets move, as also does
the sun itself. Moreover the same thing happens in the case of all the fixed stars with regard
to the centres of gravity of their systems ; & from the action of one system on another
at any distance whatever from it, some motion will be imparted to these very centres of
gravity. More generally, so long as any particle of matter, so long as any particle of light,
is in motion, all other particles, no matter how distant, which on account of this motion
have their distance from the first particle altered, must also have their gravitation altered,
& consequently must move with some very slight motion, but yet a true motion. In
the idea of a quiescent Earth, the Earth is at rest approximately, nor is it as a whole translated
from place to place ; but, due to any tremulous motion of the sea, the downward course
of rivers, even to the fly's flight, equilibrium is destroyed & some agitation is produced,
although in truth it is very slight ; yet it is quite enough to prevent true rest altogether.
Hence an analogy deduced from rest contradicts rather than corroborates virtual extension
of the simple elements of Nature, on the hypothesis of a conjunction of the same instant
of time with a continuous series of points of space.

87. But even if the foregoing analogy held good, it would not prove the matter Where the analogy
satisfactorily ; since we see that in other ways the analogy between space & time is impaired. 2^pace and tlme
For I proved, also in those paragraphs of the Supplements that I have mentioned, that

no point of matter ever returned to any point of space, in which there had once been any
other point of matter ; so that two points of matter never connected the same point of
space with two instants of time, let alone with more ; whereas a huge number of pairs of
points connect the same instant of time with two points of space, since they certainly coexist.
Besides, time has but one dimension, duration ; whilst space has three, length, breadth
& depth.

88. Therefore it can now be safely accepted that these primary elements of matter Non-extension use-
are not only simple & indivisible, but also that they are non-extended. Indeed this aun \nstanTaneous
very simplicity & non-extension of the elements will prove useful in a really large number passage from • no •
of cases for still further strengthening & corroborating the results already obtained. J^-one.0 a Very
For if the primary elements were certain solid parts, themselves composed of parts or even

virtually extended only, then, whilst we pass by a continuous motion from empty space
through one particle of this kind, there would be a sudden change from a density that is
nothing when the space is empty, to a density that is very great when the particle occupies
the whole of the space. But there is not this sudden change if we assume that the elements
are simple, non-extended & non-adjacent. For then the whole of space is merely a
continuous vacuum, &, in the continuous motion by a simple point, the passage is made
from continuous vacuum to continuous vacuum. The one point of matter occupies but
one point of space ; & this point of space is the indivisible boundary between the space
that precedes & the space that follows. There is nothing to prevent the moving point
from being carried through it by a continuous motion, nor from passing to it from any
point of space that is in immediate proximity to it : for, as I remarked above, there
is no point that is the next point to a given point. But from continuous vacuum
to continuous vacuum the passage is made through that point of space which is occupied
by the point of matter.

89. There is also the point, that arises in the theory of solid extended elements, namely Also for the idea
that the density of a body can be diminished indefinitely, but cannot be increased except j^^a'^ ^can
up to a certain fixed limit, at which the law of increase must be discontinuous. The first be decreased,
comes from the fact that this same continuous particle can be divided into any number mdefinltely-

of smaller particles ; these can be diffused through space of any size in such a way that
there is not one of them that does not have some other one at some little (as little as you
will) distance from itself. In this way the volume through which the same mass is diffused
is increased ; & when that is increased in any ratio whatever, then indeed the density
will be diminished in the same ratio, no matter how great the ratio may be. The second
thing is also evident ; for when the particles have come into contact, the density cannot
be increased any further. Moreover, since there will undoubtedly be a certain determinate
ratio for the amount of space that is empty compared with the amount of space that is
full, the density can only be increased in that ratio ; & the regular increase of density
will be arrested when contact is attained. But if the elements are points that are perfectly
indivisible & non-extended, then, just as their distances can be increased indefinitely,

88 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

in [41] ratione quacunque lineola quaecunque secari sane possit : adeoque uli nullus est
limes raritatis auctae, ita etiam nullus erit auctae densitatis.

Et ad excludendum 9°- Sed & illud commodum accidet, quod ita omne continuum coexistens eliminabitur

continuum extcn- e Natura, in quo explicando usque adeo dcsudarunt, & fere incassum, Philosophi, ncc idcirco

sum, & in infinitum j« • • « **• • • • r • j • • i • i •

in existentibus. divisio ulla realis entis in innmtum produci potent, nee naerebitur, ubi quaeratur, an numerus
partium actu distinctarum, & separabilium, sit finitus, an infinitus ; nee alia ejusmodi
sane innumera, quae in continui compositione usque adeo negotium facessunt Philosophis,
jam habebuntur. Si enim prima materiae elementa sint puncta penitus inextensa, &
indivisibilia, a se invicem aliquo intervallo disjuncta ; jam erit finitus punctorum numerus
in quavis massa : nam distantiae omnes finitae erunt ; infinitesimas enim quantitates in se
determinatas nullas esse, satis ego quidem, ut arbitror, luculcnter demonstravi & in disser-
tatione De Natura, t$ Usu infinitorum, ac infinite parvorum, & in dissertatione DC Lege
Continuitatis, & alibi. Intervallum quodcunque finitum erit, & divisibile utique in
infinitum per interpositionem aliorum, atque aliorum punctorum, quae tamen singula,
ubi fuerint posita, finita itidem erunt, & aliis pluribus, finitis tamen itidem, ubi extiterint,
locum reliquent, ut infinitum sit tantummodo in possibilibus, non autem in existentibus,
in quibus possibilibus ipsis omnem possibilium seriem idcirco ego appellare soleo constantem
terminis finitis in infinitum, quod quaecunque, quae existant, finita esse debeant, sed nullus
sit existentium finitus numerus ita ingens, ut alii, & alii majores, sed itidem finiti, haberi
non possint, atque id sine ullo limite, qui nequeat praeteriri. Hoc autcm pacto, sublato
ex existentibus omni actuali infinite, innumerae sane difficultates auferentur.

inextensionem 91. Cum igitur & positive argumento. a lege virium positive demonstrata desumpto,

qua'rend^m^e simplicitas, & inextensio primorum materiae elementorum deducatur, £ tam multis aliis

homogeneitate. vel indiciis fulciatur, vel emolumentis inde derivatis confirmetur ; ipsa itidem admitti

jam debet, ac supererit quaerendum illud tantummodo, utrum haec elementa homogenca

censeri debeant, & inter se prorsus similia, ut ea initio assumpsimus, an vero heterogenea,

ac dissimilia.

Homogeneitatem 92. Pro homogeneitate primorum materiae elementorum illud est quoddani veluti

genefta1teaprim°i!n(& Prmcipium, quod in simplicitate, & inextensione conveniant, ac etiam vires quasdam habeant
uitimi asymptotici utique omnia. Deinde curvam ipsam virium eandem esse omnino in omnibus illud indicat,
omnibus'0 P"' S ve^ etiani evincit, quod primum crus repulsivum impenetrabilitatem secum trahens, &
postremum attractivum gravitatem definiens, omnino communia in omnibus sint : nam
corpora omnia aeque impenetrabilia sunt, & vero etiam aeque gravia pro quantitate materiae
suae, uti satis [42] evincit aequalis velocitas auri, & plumse cadentis in Boyliano recipiente
Si reliquus curvae arcus intermedius esset difformis in diversis materiae punctis ; infinities
probabilius esset, difformitatem extendi etiam ad crus primum, & ultimum, cum infinities
plures sint curvae, quae, cum in reliquis differant partibus, differant plurimum etiam in
hisce extremis, quam quae in hisce extremis tantum modo tam arete consentiant. Et hoc
quidem argumento illud etiam colligitur, curvam virium in quavis directione ab eodem
primo materiae elemento, nimirum ab eodem materiae puncto eandem esse, cum & primum
impenetrabilitatis, & postremum gravitatis crus pro omnibus directionibus sit ad sensum
idem. Cum primum in dissertatione De Firibus Vivis hanc Theoriam protuli, suspicabar
diversitatem legis ' virium respondentis diversis directionibus ; sed hoc argumento adi
majorem simplicitatem, & uniformitatem deinde adductus sum. Diversitas autem legum
virium pro diversis particulis, & pro diversis respectu ejusdem particulae directionibus,
habetur utique ex diverso numero, & positione punctorum earn componentium, qua de
re inferius aliquid.

i contra deduci 93- Nee vero huic homogeneitati opponitur inductionis principium, quo ipsam
ex principio indis- Leibnitiani oppugnare solent, nee principium rationis sufficients, atque indiscernibilium,

cermbUium, & rati- . • ° . T £ • TV- • • /"• j- • -j

onis sufficients. quod supenus innui numero 3. Innmtam Divini v_onditons mentem, ego quidem omnino.
arbitror, quod & tam multi Philosophi censuerunt, ejusmodi perspicacitatem habere, atque
intuitionem quandam, ut ipsam etiam, quam individuationem appellant, omnino similium
individuorum cognoscat, atque ilia inter se omnino discernat. Rationis autem sufficientis

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 89

so also can they just as well be diminished in any ratio whatever. For it is certainly possible
that a short line can be divided into parts in any ratio whatever ; & thus, just as there
is no limit to increase of rarity, so also there is none to increase of density.

qo. The theory of non-extension is also convenient for eliminating from Nature all ^lso-/or excludms

7 / 1 • 1 • 1 1 •! 1 1 Ml 11 1 6 *"ea ° a C011"

idea of a coexistent continuum — to explain which philosophers have up till now laboured tinuum in existing

so very hard & generally in vain. Assuming non-extension, no division of a real entity thmRs- that

can be carried on indefinitely ; we shall not be brought to a standstill when we seek to
find out whether the number of parts that are actually distinct & separable is finite or
infinite ; nor with it will there come in any of those other truly innumerable difficulties
that, with the idea of continuous composition, have given so much trouble to philosophers.
For if the primary elements of matter are perfectly non-extended & indivisible points
separated from one another by some definite interval, then the number of points in any
given mass must be finite ; because all the distances are finite. I proved clearly enough,
I think, in the dissertation De Natura, & Usu infinitorum ac infinite parvorum, & in the
dissertation De Lege Continuitatis, & in other places, that there are no infinitesimal
quantities determinate in themselves. Any interval whatever will be finite, & at least
divisible indefinitely by the interpolation of other points, & still others ; each such set
however, when they have been interpolated, will be also finite in number, & leave room
for still more ; & these too, when they existed, will also be finite in number. So that
there is only an infinity of possible points, but not of existing points ; & with regard
to these possible points, I usually term the whole series of possibles a series that ends at
finite limits at infinity. This for the reason that any of them that exist must be finite
in number ; but there is no finite number of things that exist so great that other numbers,
greater & greater still, but yet all finite, cannot be obtained ; & that too without any
limit, which cannot be surpassed. Further, in this way, by doing away with all idea of
an actual infinity in existing things, truly countless difficulties are got rid of.

91. Since therefore, by a direct argument derived from a law of forces that has been Non-extension
directly proved, we have both deduced the simplicity & non-extension of the primary w"5 havea now e to
elements of matter, & also we have strengthened the theory by evidence pointing towards investigate homo-
it, or corroborated it by referring to the advantages to be derived from it ; this theory gen

ought now to be accepted as true. There only remains the investigation as to whether
these elements ought to be considered to be homogeneous & perfectly similar to one
another, as we assumed at the start, or whether they are really heterogeneous & dissimilar.

92. In favour of the homogeneity of the primary elements of matter we have so to Homogeneity for
speak some foundation derived from the fact that all of them agree in simplicity & non- Voca!tedStf0romaa
extension, & also that they are all endowed with forces of some sort. Now, that this consideration of
curve of forces is exactly the same for all of them is indicated or even proved by the fact Of 6the °fir?t86™ last
that the first repulsive branch necessitating impenetrability, & the last attractive branch a s y"m p t o t i c
determining gravitation, are exactly the same in all respects. For all bodies are equally c^l S forces*
impenetrable ; & also all are equally heavy in proportion to the amount of matter

contained in them, as is sufficiently proved by the equal velocity of the piece of gold &
the feather when falling in Boyle's experiment. If the remaining intermediate arc of the
curve were non-uniform for different points of matter, it would be infinitely more probable
that the non-uniformity would extend also to the first & last branches also ; for there
are infinitely more curves which, when they differ in the remaining parts, also differ to
the greatest extent in the extremes, than there are curves, which agree so closely only in
these extremes. Also from this argument we can deduce that the curve of forces is indeed
exactly the same from the same point of matter, in any direction whatever from the same
primary element of matter ; for both the first branch of impenetrability & the last branch
of gravitation are the same, so far as we can perceive, for all directions. When I first
published this Theory in my dissertation De Firibus Fivis, I was inclined to believe that
there was a diversity in the law of forces corresponding to diversity of direction ; but I
was led by the argument given above to the greater simplicity & the greater uniformity
derived therefrom. Further, diversity of the laws of forces for diverse particles, & for
different directions with the same particle, is certainly to be obtained from the diverse
number & position of the points composing it ; about which I shall have something
to say later.

93. Nor indeed is there anything opposed to this idea of homogeneity to be derived Notl?ins t? b«

r i • • i r • i J i o rr t o /_ . brought against

from the principle of induction, by means of which the followers of Leibniz usually raise this from the doc-
an objection to it ; nor from the principle of sufficient reason, & of indiscernibles, that fc™es°f .indj.scern:

J . , . . . -rr • i i • -TO i_ ibles & sufficient

1 mentioned above in Art. 3. I am indeed quite convinced, & a great many other reason.1
philosophers too have thought, that the Infinite Will of the Divine Founder has a
perspicacity & an intuition of such a nature that it takes cognizance of that which is
called individuation amongst individuals that are perfectly similar, & absolutely

90

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

principium falsum omnino esse censeo, ac ejusmodi, ut omnem verse libertatis ideam omnino
tollat ; nisi pro ratione, ubi agitur de voluntatis determinatione, ipsum liberum arbitrium,
ipsa libera determinatio assumatur, quod nisi fiat in voluntate divina, quaccunque existunt,
necessario existunt, & qusecunque non existunt, ne possibilia quidem erunt, vera aliqua
possibilitate, uti facile admodum demonstratur ; quod tamen si semel admittatur, mirum
sane, quam prona demum ad fatalem necessitatem patebit via. Quamobrem potest divina
voluntas determinari ex toto solo arbitrio suo ad creandum hoc individuum potius, quam
illud ex omnibus omnino similibus, & ad ponendum quodlibet ex iis potius eo loco, quo
ponit, quam loco alterius. Sed de rationis sufficientis principio haec ipsa fusius pertractavi
turn in aliis locis pluribus, turn in Stayanis Supplementis, ubi etiam illud ostendi, id prin-
cipium nullum habere usum posse in iis ipsis casibus, in quibus adhibetur, & praedicari solet
tantopere, atque id idcirco, quod nobis non innotescant rationes omnes, quas tamen
oporteret utique omnes nosse ad hoc, ut eo principio uti possemus, amrmando, nullam
esse rationem sufncientem pro hoc potius, quam pro illo [43] alio : sane in exemplo illo
ipso, quod adhiberi solet, Archimedis hoc principio aequilibrium determinantis, ibidem
ostendi, ex ignoratione causarum, sive rationum, quse postea detectae sunt, ipsum in suae
investigationis progressu errasse plurimum, deducendo per abusum ejus principii sphsericam
figuram marium, ac Telluris.

combinatiombus.

Posse etiam puncta 94. Accedit & illud, quod ilia puncta materiae, licet essent prorsus similia in simplicitate,

dlfierrTin aiiis 11S> & extensione, ac mensura virium, pendentium a distantia, possent alias habere proprietates

metaphysicas diversas inter se, nobis ignotas, quae ipsa etiam apud ipsos Leibnitianos

discriminarent.

Non vaierehicprin- 95. Quod autem attinet ad inductionem, quam Leibnitiani desumunt a dissimilitudine,

a^ma^sis^eas^de! quam observamus in rebus omnibus, cum nimirum nusquam ex. gr. in amplissima silva reperire
ferre ex diversis sit duo folia prorsus similia ; ea sane me nihil movet ; cum nimirum illud discrimen sit
prOprietas relativa ad rationem aggregati, & nostros sensus, quos singula materiae elementa
non afficiunt vi sufficiente ad excitandam in animo ideam, nisi multa sint simul, & in molem
majorem excrescant. Porro scimus utique combinationes ejusdem numeri terminorum
in immensum excrescere, si ille ipse numerus sit aliquanto major. Solis 24 litterulis
Alphabet! diversimodo combinatis formantur voces omnes, quibus hue usque usa sunt
omnia idiomata, quae extiterunt, & quibus omnia ilia, quae possunt existere, uti possunt.
Quid si numerus earum existeret tanto major, quanto major est numerus puuctorum
materiae in quavis massa sensibili ? Quod ibi diversus est litterarum diversarum ordo, id
in punctis etiam prorsus homogeneis sunt positiones, & distantia, quibus variatis, variatur
utique forma, & vis, qua sensus afficitur in aggregatis. Quanto major est numerus
combinationum diversarum possibilium in massis sensibilibus, quam earum massarum, quas
possumus observare, & inter se conferre (qui quidem ob distantias, & directiones in infinitum
variabiles praescindendo ab aequilibrio virium, est infinitus, cum ipso aequilibrio est immen-
sus) ; tanto major est improbabilitas duarum massarum omnino similium, quam omnium
aliquantisper saltern inter se dissimilium.

Physica ratio dis- 96. Et quidem accedit illud etiam, quod alicujus dissimilitudinis in aggregatis physicam

massU1ut1in1foriiuUS I1100!116 rationem cernimus in iis etiam casibus, in quibus maxime inter se similia esse
deberent. Cum enim mutuae vires ad distantias quascunque pertineant ; status uniuscu-
jusque puncti pendebit saltern aliquantisper a statu omnium aliorum punctorum, quae
sunt in Mundo. Porro utcunque puncta quaedam sint parum a se invicem remota, uti
sunt duo folia in eadem silva, & multo magis in eodem ramo ; adhuc tamen non eandem
prorsus relationem distantiae, & virium habent ad reliqua omnia materiae puncta, quae
[44] sunt in Mundo, cum non eundem prorsus locum obtineant ; & inde jam in aggregate
discrimen aliquod oriri debet, quod perfectam similitudinem omnino impediat. Sed illud
earn inducit magis, quod quae maxime conferunt ad ejusmodi dispositionem, necessario
respectu diversarum frondium diversa non nihil esse debeant. Omissa ipsa earum forma
in semine, solares radii, humoris ad nutritionem necessarii quantitas, distantia, a qua debet
is progredi, ut ad locum suum deveniat, aura ipsa, & agitatio inde orta, non sunt omnino
similia, sed diversitatem aliquam habent, ex qua diversitas in massas inde efformatas
redundat.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 91

distinguishes them one from the other. Moreover, I consider that the principle of sufficient
reason is altogether false, & one that is calculated to take away all idea of true freewill.
Unless free choice or free determination is assumed as the basis of argument, in discussing
the determination of will, unless this is the case with the Divine Will, then, whatever
things exist, exist because they must do so, & whatever things do not exist will not even
be possible, i.e., with any real possibility, as is very easily proved. Nevertheless, once this
idea is accepted, it is truly wonderful how it tends to point the way finally to fatalistic
necessity. Hence the Divine Will is able, of its own pleasure alone, to be determined
to the creation of one individual rather than another out of a whole set of exactly similar
things, & to the setting of any one of these in the place in which it puts it rather than in
the place of another. But I have discussed these very matters more at length, besides several
other places, in the Supplements to Stay's Philosophy ; where I have shown that the
principle cannot be employed in those instances in which it is used & generally so strongly
asserted. The reason being that all possible reasons are not known to us ; & yet they
should certainly be known, to enable us to employ the principle by stating that there is
no sufficient reason in favour of this rather than that other. In truth, in that very example
of the principle generally given, namely, that of Archimedes' determination of equilibrium
by means of it, I showed also that Archimedes himself had made a very big mistake in following
out his investigation because of his lack of knowledge of causes or reasons that were discovered
in later days, when he deduced a spherical figure for the seas & the Earth by an abuse
of this principle.

94. There is also this, that these points of matter, although they might be perfectly it is possible for
similar as regards simplicity & extension, & in having the measure of their forces depen- ^"^ese^ro erties
dent on their distances, might still have other metaphysical properties different from one but to disagree in
another, & unknown to us ; & these distinctions also are made by the followers of others-
Leibniz.

95. As regards the induction which the followers of Leibniz make from the lack of The principle does
similitude that we see in all things, (for instance such as that there never can be found in n°t.hold g°°d here

T_ i j i i vi \ i • i • . , °* induction from

the largest wood two leaves exactly alike), their argument does not impress me in the masses; they differ

slightest degree. For that distinction is a property that is concerned with reasoning for °.n account of

an aggregate, & also with our senses ; & these senses single elements of matter cannot tionsof their parta.

influence with sufficient force to excite an idea in the mind, except when there are many

of them together at a time, & they develop into a mass of considerable size. Further

it is well known that combinations of the same number of terms increase enormously, if

that number itself increase a little. From the 24 letters of the alphabet alone, grouped

together in different ways, are formed all the words that have hitherto been used in all

expressions that have existed, or can possibly come into existence. What then if their

number were increased to equal the number of points of matter in any sensible mass ?

Corresponding to the different order of the several letters in the one, we have in perfectly

homogeneous points also different positions & distances ; & if these are altered at least

the form & the force, which affect our senses in the groups, are altered as well. How

much greater is the number of different combinations that are possible in sensible masses

than the number of those masses that we can observe & compare with one another (&

this number, on account of the infinitely variable distances & directions of the forces,

when equilibrium is precluded, is infinite, since including equilibrium it is very great) ;

just so much greater is the improbability of two masses being exactly similar than of

their being all at least slightly different from one another.

96. There is also this point in addition ; we discern a physical reason as well for some Physical reason for
dissimilarity in groups for those cases too, in which they ought to be especially similar to the difference in

.1 -n • i f • 11 -11 T r i ' several masses, as

one another, ror since mutual forces pertain to all possible distances, the state of any in leaves.
one point will depend upon, at least in some slight degree, the state of all other points
that are in the universe. Further, however short the distance between certain points may
be, as of two leaves in the same wood, much more so on the same branch, still for all
that they do not have quite the same relation as regards distance & forces as all the rest
of the points of matter that are in the universe, because they do not occupy quite the
same place. Hence in a group some distinction is bound to arise which will entirely prevent
perfect similarity. Moreover this tendency is all the stronger, because those things which
especially conduce to this sort of disposition must necessarily be somewhat different with
regard to different leaves. For the form itself being absent in the seed, the rays of the
sun, the quantity of moisture necessary for nutrition, the distance from which it has to
proceed to arrive at the place it occupies, the air itself & the continual motion derived
from this, these are not exactly similar, but have some diversity ; & from this diversity
there proceeds a diversity in the masses thus formed.

92 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

simiiitudine quaii- 97. Patet igitur, varietatem illam a numero pendere combinationum possibilium in

^ numero punctorum necessario ad sensationem, & circumstantiarum, quae ad formationem

geneitatem, quam massze sunt neccssariae, adeoque ejusmodi inductionem extend! ad elementa non posse.

* '

Quin immo ilia tanta similitude, quae cum exigua dissimilitudine commixta invenitur in
tarn multis corporibus, indicat potius similitudinem ingentem in elementis. Nam ob
tantum possibilium combinationum numerum, massae elementorum etiam penitus homo-
geneorum debent a se invicem differre plurimum, adeoque si elementa heterogenea sint,
in immensum majorem debent habere dissimilitudinem, quam ipsa prima elementa, ex
quibus idcirco nullae massas, ne tantillum quidem, similes provenire deberent. Cum
elementa multo minus dissimilia esse debeant, quam aggregata elementorum, multo
magis ad elementorum homogeneitatem valere debet ilia quaecunque similitudo, quam
in corporibus observamus, potissimum in tarn multis, quae ad eandem pertinent speciem,
quam ad homogeneitatem eorundem tarn exiguum illud discrimen, quod in aliis tarn
multis observatur. Rem autem penitus conficit ilia tanta similitudo, qua superius usi
sumus, in primo crure exhibente impenetrabilitatem, & in postremo exhibente gravitatem
generalem, quae crura cum ob hasce proprietates corporibus omnibus adeo generales, adeo
inter se in omnibus similia sint, etiam reliqui arcus curvae exprimentis vires omnimodam
similitudinem indicant pro corporibus itidem omnibus.

Homogeneitatem 98. Superest, quod ad hanc rem pertinet, illud unum iterum hie monendum, quod

insinuarr' ^xem* ipsum etiam initio hujus Operis innui, ipsam Naturam, & ipsum analyseos ordinem nos

plum a libris, lit- ducere ad simplicitatem & homogeneitatem elementorum, cum nimirum, quo analysis

ns> pul promovetur magis, eo ad pauciora, & inter se minus discrepantia principia deveniatur, uti

patet in resolutionibus Chemicis. Quam quidem rem ipsum litterarum, & vocum exemplum

multo melius animo sistet. Fieri utique possent nigricantes litteras, non ductu atramenti

continue, sed punctulis rotundis nigricantibus, & ita parum a se invicem remotis, ut inter-

valla non nisi ope microscopii discerni possent, & quidem ipsae litterarum formae pro typis

fieri pos-[45]-sent ex ejusmodi rotundis sibi proximis cuspidibus constantes. Concipiatur

ingens quaedam bibliotheca, cujus omnes libri constent litteris impressis, ac sit incredibilis

in ea multitude librorum conscriptorum linguis variis, in quibus omnibus forma charac-

terum sit eadem. Si quis scripturae ejusmodi, & linguarum ignarus circa ejusmodi libros,

quos omnes a se invicem discrepantes intueretur, observationem institueret cum diligenti

contemplatione ; primo quidem inveniret vocum farraginem quandam, quae voces in

quibusdam libris occurrerent saepe, cum eaedem in aliis nusquam apparent, & inde lexica

posset quaedam componere totidem numero, quot idiomata sunt, in quibus singulis omnes

ejusdem idiomatis voces reperirentur, quae quidem numero admodum pauca essent, discri-

mine illo ingenti tot, tarn variorum librorum redacto ad illud usque adeo minus discrimen,

quod contineretur lexicis illis, & haberetur in vocibus ipsa lexica constituentibus. At

inquisitione promota, facile adverteret, omnes illas tarn varias voces constare ex 24

tantummodo diversis litteris, discrimen aliquod inter se habentibus in ductu linearum,

quibus formantur, quarum combinatio diversa pareret omnes illas voces tarn varias, ut

earum combinatio libros efformaret usque adeo magis a se invicem discrepantes. Et ille

quidem si aliud quodcunque sine microscopic examen institueret, nullum aliud inveniret

magis adhuc simile elementorum genus, ex quibus diversa ratione combinatis orirentur

ipsae litterse ; at microscopic arrepto, intueretur utique illam ipsam litterarum composi-

tionem e punctis illis rotundis prorsus homogeneis, quorum sola diversa positio, ac

distributio litteras exhiberet.

Appiicatio exempli 99. Haec mihi quaedam imago videtur esse eorum, quae cernimus in Natura. Tarn

a<^ Naturae analy- mu\t{} tam var;j fift ijbrj corpora sunt, & quae ad diversa pertinent regna, sunt tanquam
diversis conscripta linguis. Horum omnium Chemica analysis principia quaedam invenit
minus inter se difrormia, quam sint libri, nimirum voces. Hae tamen ipsae inter se habent
discrimen aliquod, ut tam multas oleorum, terrarum, salium species eruit Chemica analysis
e diversis corporibus. Ulterior analysis harum, veluti vocum, litteras minus adhuc inter
se difformes inveniret, & ultima juxta Theoriam meam deveniret ad homogenea punctula,
quae ut illi circuli nigri litteras, ita ipsa diversas diversorum corporum particulas per solam
dispositionem diversam efformarent : usque adeo analogia ex ipsa Naturae consideratione

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 93

97. It is clear then that this variety depends on the number of possible combinations Homogeneity is to
to be found for the number of points that are necessary to make the mass sensible, & ^m d<^° ™ort * ot
of the circumstances that arenecessary for the formation of the mass ; & so it is not similitude in some
possible that the induction should be extended to the elements. Nay rather, the great heterogeneity from"
similarity that is found accompanied by some very slight dissimilarity in so many bodies dissimilarity.
points more strongly to the greatest possible similarity of the elements. For on account

of the great number of the possible combinations, even masses of elements that are perfectly
homogeneous must be greatly different from one another ; & thus if the elements are
heterogeneous, the masses must have an immensely greater dissimilarity than the primary
elements themselves ; & therefore no masses formed from these ought to come out similar,
not even in the very slightest degree. Since the elements are bound to be much less
dissimilar than aggregates formed from these elements, homogeneity of the elements must
be indicated by that certain similarity that we observe in bodies, especially in so many
of those that belong to the same species, far more strongly than heterogeneity of the elements
is indicated by the slight differences that are observed in so many others. The whole
discussion is made perfectly complete by that great similarity, which we made use of above,
that exists in the first branch representing impenetrability, & in the last branch representing
universal gravitation ; for since these branches, on account of properties that are so general
to all bodies, are so similar to one another in all cases, they indicate complete similarity
of the remaining arc of the curve expressing the forces for all bodies as well.

98. Naught that concerns this subject remains but for me to once more mention in Homogeneity is
this connection that one thing, which I have already remarked at the beginning of this anftysis of Nature"
work, namely, that Nature itself & the method of analysis lead us towards simplicity & example taken
homogeneity of the elements ; since in truth the farther the analysis is pushed, the fewer ancj dots° '

the fundamental substances we arrive at & the less they differ from one another ; as is
to be seen in chemical experiments. This will be presented to the mind far more clearly
by an illustration derived from letters & words. Suppose we have made black letters,
not by drawing a continuous line with ink, but by means of little black dots which are at
such small distances from one another that the intervals cannot be perceived except with
the aid of a microscope — & indeed such forms of letters may be made as types from round
points of this sort set close to one another. Now imagine that we have a huge library,
all the books in it consisting of printed letters, & let there be an incredible multitude
of books printed in various languages, in all which the form of the characters is the same.
If anyone, who was ignorant of such compositions or languages, started on a careful study
of books of this kind, all of which he would perceive differed from one another ; then first
of all he would find a medley of words, some of which occurred frequently in certain books
whilst they never appeared at all in others. Hence he could compose lexicons, as many
in number as there are languages ; in each of these all words of the same language would
be found, & these would indeed be very few in number ; for the immense multiplicity
of words in this numerous collection of books of so many kinds is now reduced to what
is still a multiplicity, but smaller, than is contained in the lexicons & the words forming
these lexicons. Now if he continued his investigation, he would easily perceive that the
whole of these words of so many different kinds were formed from 24 letters only ; that
these differed in some sort from one another in the manner in which the lines forming
them were drawn ; that the different combinations of these would produce the whole of
that great variety of words, & that combinations of these words would form books differing
from one another still more widely. Now if he made yet another examination without the
aid of a microscope, he would not find any other kind of elements that were more similar
to one another than these letters, from a combination of which in different ways the letters
themselves could be produced. But if he took a microscope, then indeed would he see
the mode of formation of the letters from the perfectly homogeneous round points, by
the different position & distribution of which the letters were depicted.

99. This seems to me to be a sort of picture of what we perceive in Nature. Those Application of the

i,-7-7 . ,..,. r., i T n i 1-111 illustration to the

books, so many m number & so different in character are bodies, & those which belong analysis of Nature.

to the different kingdoms are written as it were in different tongues. Of all of these,

chemical analysis finds out certain fundamental constituents that are less unlike one another

than the books ; these are the words. Yet these constituent substances have some sort

of difference amongst themselves, & thus chemical analysis produces a large number of

species of oils, earths & salts from different bodies. Further analysis of these, like that

of the words, would disclose the letters that are still less unlike one another ; & finally,

according to my Theory, the little homogeneous points would be obtained. These, just

as the little black circles formed the letters, would form the diverse particles of diverse

bodies through diverse arrangement alone. So far then the analogy derived from such a

94 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

derivata non ad difformitatem, sed ad conformitatem elementorum nos ducit.

Transitus a pro- ioo. Atque hoc demum pacto ex principiis certis & vulgo receptis, per legitimam,

ad consectariorum seriem devenimus ad omnem illam, quam initio proposui, Theoriam,
nimirum ad legem virium mutuarum, & ad constitutionem primorum materiae elementorum
ex ilia ipsa virium lege derivatorum. [46] Videndum jam superest, quam uberes inde
fructus per universam late Physicam colligantur, explicatis per earn unam praecipuis cor-
porum proprietatibus, & Naturae phaenomenis. Sed antequam id aggredior, praecipuas
quasdam e difficultatibus, quae contra Theoriam ipsam vel objectae jam sunt, vel in oculos
etiam sponte incurrunt, dissolvam, uti promisi.

Legem virium non ioi. Contra vires mutuas illud sclent objicere, illas esse occultas quasdam qualitates,

in distans,anec0esse ve^ etiam actionem in distans inducere. His satisfit notione virium exhibita numero 8,
occuitam quaiita- & 9. Illud unum praeterea hie addo, admodum manifestas eas esse, quarum idea admodum
facile efformatur, quarum existentia positive argumento evincitur, quarum effectus multi-
plices continue oculis observantur. Sunt autem ejusmodi hae vires. Determinationis
ad accessum, vel recessum idea efformatur admodum facile. Constat omnibus, quid sit
accedere, quid recedere ; constat, quid sit esse indifferens, quid determinatum ; adeoque
& determinationis ad accessum, vel recessum habetur idea admodum sane distincta.
Argumenta itidem positiva, quae ipsius ejusmodi determinationis existentiam probant,
superius prolata sunt. Demum etiam motus varii, qui ab ejusmodi viribus oriuntur, ut
ubi corpus quoddam incurrit in aliud corpus, ubi partem solidi arreptam pars alia sequitur,
ubi vaporum, vel elastrorum particulae se invicem repellunt, ubi gravia descendunt, hi
motus, inquam, quotidie incurrant in oculos. Patet itidem saltern in genere forma curvae
ejusmodi vires exprimentis. Haec omnia non occuitam, sed patentem reddunt ejusmodi
virium legem.

Quid adhuc lateat : IO2. Sunt quidem adhuc quaedam, quae ad earn pertinent, prorsus incognita, uti est

admittendam om- numerus, & distantia intersectionum curvae cum axe, forma arcuum intermediorum, atque

nino : quo pacto .. . ,. -11 i -11 i i i •

evitetur hie actio alia ejusmodi, quae quidem longe superant humanum captum, & quas me solus habuit
in distans. omnia simul prae oculis, qui Mundum condidit ; sed id omnino nil officit. Nee sane

id ipsum in causa esse debet, ut non admittatur illud, cujus existentiam novimus, & cujus
proprietates plures, & effectus deprehendimus ; licet alia multa nobis incognita eodem
pertinentia supersint. Sic aurum incognitam, occultamque substantiam nemo appellant,
& multo minus ejusdem existentiam negabit idcirco, quod admodum probabile sit, plures
alias latere ipsius proprietates, olim forte detegendas, uti'aliae tarn multae subinde detectae
sunt, & quia non patet oculis, qui sit particularum ipsum componentium textus, quid, &
qua ratione Natura ad ejus compositionem adhibeat. Quod autem pertinet ad actionem
in distans, id abunde ibidem praevenimus, cum inde pateat fieri posse, ut punctum quodvis
in se ipsum agat, & ad actionis directionem, ac energiam determinetur ab altero puncto,
vel ut Deus juxta liberam sibi legem a se in Natura condenda stabilitam motum progignat
in utroque pun-[47]-cto. Illud sane mihi est evidens, nihilo magis occuitam esse, vel explicatu,
& captu difficilem productionem. motus per hasce vires pendentes a certis distantiis, quam
sit productio motus vulgo concepta per immediatum impulsum, ubi ad motum determinat
impenetrabilitas, quae itidem vel a corporum natura, vel a libera conditoris lege repeti
debet.

sine impuisione 103. Et quidem hoc potius pacto, quam per impulsionem, in motuum causas, & leges

Mst'hucus^'u^N™ inquirendum esse, illud etiam satis indicat, quod ubi hue usque, impuisione omissa, vires

turam, & menus ex- adhibitae sunt a distantiis pendentes, ibi sane tantummodo accurate definita sunt omnia,

phcajidam. impost- atque determinata, & ad calculum redacta cum phaenomenis congruunt ultra, quam sperare

liceret, accuratissime. Ego quidem ejusmodi in explicando, ac determinando felicitatem

nusquam alibi video in universa Physica, nisi tantummodo in Astronomia mechanica, quae

abjectis vorticibus, atque omni impuisione submota, per gravitatem generalem absolvit

omnia, ac in Theoria luminis, & colorum, in quibus per vires in aliqua distantia agentes,

& reflexionem, & refractionem, & diffractionem Newtonus exposuit, ac priorum duarum,

potissimum leges omnes per calculum, & Geometriam determinavit, & ubi ilia etiam, quae

ad diversas vices facilioris transmissus, & facilioris reflexionis, quas Physici passim relinquunt

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 95

consideration of Nature leads us not to non-uniformity but to uniformity of the
elements.

100. Thus at length, from known principles that are commonly accepted, by a Pa^g ,,fro™ the

... , , , ° .' . .r r , i i % i n-<i i T • i proof of the Theory

legitimate series of deductions, we have arrived at the whole of the I heory that I enunciated to the considera-
at the start ; that is to say. at a law of mutual forces & the constitution of the primary tion °f. objections

, ' i • i ,- i re XT • i r i ' against it.

elements of matter derived from that law of forces. Now it remains to be seen what a
bountiful harvest is to be gathered throughout the wide field of general physics ; for from
this one theory we obtain explanations of all the chief properties of bodies, & of the
phenomena of Nature. But before I go on to that, I will give solutions of a few of the
principal difficulties that have been raised against the Theory itself, as well as some that
naturally meet the eye, according to the promise I made.

10 1. The objection is frequently brought forward against mutual forces that they The law o{ forces

,J . * «. . « , . . j. mi • does not necessi-

are some sort of mysterious qualities or that they necessitate action at a distance. This tate action at a

is answered by the idea of forces outlined in Art. 8, & 9. In addition, I will make just distance, nor is it

one remark, namely, that it is quite evident that these forces exist, that an idea of them quTuty. "

can be easily formed, that their existence is demonstrated by direct reasoning, & that

the manifold results that arise from them are a matter of continual ocular observation.

Moreover these forces are of the following nature. The idea of a propensity to approach

or of a propensity to recede is easily formed. For everybody knows what approach means,

and what recession is ; everybody knows what it means to be indifferent, & what having

a propensity means ; & thus the idea of a propensity to approach, or to recede, is perfectly

distinctly obtained. Direct arguments, that prove the existence of this kind of propensity,

have been given above. Lastly also, the various motions that arise from forces of this

kind, such as when one body collides with another body, when one part of a solid is seized

& another part follows it, when the particles of gases, & of springs, repel one another,

when heavy bodies descend, these motions, I say, are of everyday occurrence before our

eyes. It is evident also, at least in a general way, that the form of the curve represents

forces of this kind. In all of these there is nothing mysterious ; on the contrary they all

tend to make the law of forces of this kind perfectly plain.

102. There are indeed certain things that relate to the law of forces of which we are What is so far un
altogether ignorant, such as the number & distances of the intersections of the curve J^0^ idmitted°m
with the axis, the shape of the intervening arcs, & other things of that sort ; these indeed ail detail ; the way
far surpass human understanding, & He alone, Who founded the universe, had the whole ^ action1 atha to*
before His eyes. But truly there is no reason on that account, why a thing, whose existence tance is eliminated,
we fully recognize, & many of the properties & results of which are readily understood,

should not be accepted ; although certainly there do remain many other things pertaining
to it that are unknown to us. For instance, nobody would call gold an unknown &
mysterious substance, & still less would deny its existence, simply because it is quite
probable that many of its properties are unknown to us, to be discovered perhaps in the
future, as so many others have been already discovered from time to time, or because it
is not visually apparent what is the texture of the particles composing it, or why & in
what way Nature adopts that particular composition. Again, as regards action at a distance,
we amply guard against this by the same means ; for, if this is admitted, then it would
be possible for any point to act upon itself, & to be determined as to its direction of action
& energy apart from another point, or that God should produce in either point a motion
according to some arbitrary law fixed by Him when founding the universe. To my mind
indeed it is clear that motions produced by these forces depending on the distances are
not a whit more mysterious, involved or difficult of understanding than the production
of motion by immediate impulse as it is usually accepted ; in which impenetrability
determines the motion, & the latter has to be derived just the same either from the nature
of solid bodies, or from an arbitrary law of the founder of the universe.

103. Now, that the investigation of the causes & laws of motion are better made As far as we have
by my method, than through the idea of impulse, is sufficiently indicated by the fact that, f^' m0reUIciearJy
where hitherto we have omitted impulse & employed forces depending on the distances, explained without
only in this way has everything been accurately defined & determined, & when reduced g^1 what

to calculation everything agrees with the phenomena with far more accuracy than we will be so too.
could possibly have expected. Indeed I do not see anywhere such felicity in explaining
& determining the matters of general physics, except only in celestial mechanics ; in
which indeed, rejecting the idea of vortices, & doing away with that of impulse entirely,
Newton gave a solution of everything by means of universal gravitation ; & in the theory
of light & colours, where by means of forces acting at some distance he explained reflection,
refraction & diffraction ; &, especially in the two first mentioned, he determined all
the laws by calculus & Geometry. Here also those things depending on alternate fits
of easier transmission & easier reflection, which physicists everywhere leave almost

96

PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

fere intactas, ac alia multa admodum feliciter determinantur, explicanturque, quod & ego
praestiti in dissertatione De Lumine, & praestabo hie in tertia parte ; cum in ceteris Physicae
partibus plerumque explicationes habeantur subsidariis quibusdam principiis innixae &
vagas admodum. Unde jam illud conjectare licet, si ab impulsione immediata penitus
recedatur, & sibi constans ubique adhibeatur in Natura agendi ratio a distantiis pendens,
multo sane facilius, & certius explicatum iri cetera ; quod quidem mihi omnino successit,
ut patebit inferius, ubi Theoriam ipsam applicavero ad Naturam.

Non fieri saltum in

tracfiva ad repui-
sivam.

104. Solent & illud objicere, in hac potissimo Theoria virium committi saltum ilium,
a(^ quern evitandum ea inprimis admittitur ; fieri enim transitum ab attractionibus ad
repulsiones per saltum, ubi nimirum a minima ultima repulsione ad minimam primam
attractionem transitur. At isti continuitatis naturam, quam supra exposuimus, nequaquam
intelligunt. Saltus, cui evitando Theoria inducitur, in eo consistit, quod ab una magnitudine
ad aliam eatur sine transitu per intermedias. Id quidem non accidit in casu exposito.
Assumatur quaecunque vis repulsiva utcunque parva ; turn quaecunque vis attractiva.
Inter eas intercedunt omnes vires repulsivae minores usque ad zero, in quo habetur deter-
minatio ad conservandum praecedentum statum quietis, vel motus uniformis in directum :
turn omnes vires attractivae a z^-[48]-ro usque ad earn determinatam vim, & omnino nullus
erit ex hisce omnibus intermediis statibus, quern aliquando non sint habitura puncta, quae
a repulsione abeunt ad attractionem. Id ipsum facile erit contemplari in fig. i, in qua a
vi repulsiva br ad attractionem dh itur utique continue motu puncti b ad d transeundo
per omnes intermedias, & per ipsum zero in E sine ullo saltu ; cum ordinata in eo motu
habitura sit omnes magnitudines minores priore br usque ad zero in E ; turn omnes oppositas
majores usque ad posteriorem dh. Qui in ea veluti imagine mentis oculos defigat, is omnem
apparentem difficultatem videbit plane sibi penitus evanescere.

Nuiium esse post- JOP Quod autem additur de postremo repulsionis gradu, & primo attractionis nihil

remum attractions, -1. ... r,....r, .,

A: primum repuisio- sane probaret, quando etiam essent aliqui n gradus postrerm, & primi ; nam ab altero
ms gradum, qm si eorum transiretur ad alterum per intermedium illud zero, & ex eo ipso, quod illi essent

essent, adhuc tran- .....*. . ,. . .

sire per omnes in- postremus, ac primus, mhil omitteretur mtermeaium, quae tamen sola intermedn omissio
termedios. continuitatis legem evertit, & saltum inducit. Sed nee habetur ullus gradus postremus,

aut primus, sicut nulla ibi est ordinata postrema, aut prima, nulla lineola omnium minima.
Data quacunque lineola utcunque exigua, aliae ilia breviores habentur minores, ac minores
ad infinitum sine ulla ultima, in quo ipso stat, uti supra etiam monuimus, continuitatis
natura. Quamobrem qui primum, aut ultimum sibi confingit in lineola, in vi, in celeritatis
gradu, in tempusculo, is naturam continuitatis ignorat, quam supra hie innui, & quam ego
idcirco initio meae dissertationis De Lege Continuitatis abunde exposui.

potest cuipiam saltern illud, ejusmodi legem virium, & curvam, quam in
curvae, & duobus fig. I protuli, esse nimium complicatam, compositam, & irregularem, quae nimirum coalescat
virium genenbus. ex }ngenti numero arcuum jam attractivorum, jam repulsivorum, qui inter se nullo pacto
cohaereant ; rem eo redire, ubi erat olim, cum apud Peripateticos pro singulis proprietatibus
corporum singulae qualitates distinctae, & pro diversis speciebus diversae formae substantiales
confingebaritur ad arbitrium. Sunt autem, qui & illud addant, repulsionem, & attractionem
esse virium genera inter se diversa ; satius esse, alteram tantummodo adhibere, & repulsionem
explicare tantummodo per attractionem minorem.

repuisivam positive I07- Inprimis quod ad hoc postremum pertinet, satis patet, per positivam meae

demonstrari prater Theoriae probationem immediate evinci repulsionem ita, ut a minore attractione repeti
omnino non possit ; nam duae materiae particulae si etiam solae in Mundo essent, & ad se
invicem cum aliqua velocitatum inaequalitate accederent, deberent utique ante contactum
ad sequalitatem devenire vi, quse a nulla attractione pendere posset.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 97

untouched, & many other matters were most felicitously determined & explained by
him ; & also that which I enunciated in the dissertation De Lumine, & will repeat in
the third part of this work. For in other parts of physics most of the explanations are
independent of, & disconnected from, one another, being based on several subsidiary
principles. Hence we may now conclude that if, relinquishing all idea of immediate
impulses, we employ a reason for the action of Nature that is everywhere the same &
depends on the distances, the remainder will be explained with far greater ease & certainty ;
& indeed it is altogether successful in my hands, as will be evident later, when I come
to apply the Theory to Nature.

104. It is very frequently objected that, in this Theory more especially, a sudden change There is no sudden
is made in the forces, whilst the theory is to be accepted for the very purpose of avoiding sitfwPfrom aiTat-
such a thing. For it is said that the transition from attractions to repulsions is made tractive to a repui-
suddenly, namely, when we pass from the last extremely minute repulsive force to the
first extremely minute attractive force. But those who raise these objections in no wise
understand the nature of continuity, as it has been explained above. The sudden change,
to avoid which the Theory has been brought forward, consists in the fact that a passage
is made from one magnitude to another without going through the intermediate stages.
Now this kind of thing does not take place in the case under consideration. Take any
repulsive force, however small, & then any attractive force. Between these two there
lie all the repulsive forces that are less than the former right down to zero, in which there
is the propensity for preserving the original state of rest or of uniform motion in a straight
line ; & also all the attractive forces from zero up to the prescribed attractive force,
& there will be absolutely no one of all these intermediate states, which will not be possessed
at some time or other by the points as they pass from repulsion to attraction. This can
be readily understood from a study of Fig. I, where indeed the passage is made from the
repulsive force br to the attractive force dh by the continuous motion of a point from b to
d ; the passage is made through every intermediate stage, & through zero at E, without
any sudden change. For in this motion there will be obtained as ordinates all magnitudes,
less than the first one br, down to zero at E, & after that all magnitudes of opposite sign
greater than zero as far as the last ordinate dh. Anyone, who will fix his intellectual vision
on this as on a sort of pictorial illustration cannot fail to perceive for himself that all the
apparent difficulty vanishes completely.

i OS. Further, as regards what is said in addition about the last stage of repulsion & T^1"6 & no !ast

, r . . 11 11 TI 1111 stage of attraction,

the first stage of attraction, it would really not matter, even if there were these so called and no first for re-
last & first stages ; for, from one of them to the other the passage would be made through puisjon ; and even

6 ,.' . . , i c° if there were, the

the one intermediate stage, namely zero ; since it passes zero, & because they are the nrst passage would be

& last, therefore no intermediate stage is omitted. Nevertheless the omission of this pade through ail

intermediate alone would upset the law of continuity, & introduce a sudden change.

But, as a matter of fact, there cannot possibly be a last stage or a first ; just as there cannot

be a last ordinate or a first in the curve, that is to say, a short line that is the least of

them all. Given any short line, no matter how short, there will be others shorter than

it, less & less in infinite succession without any limit whatever ; & in this, as we remarked

also above, there lies the nature of continuity. Hence anyone who brings forward the

idea of a first or a last in the case of a line, or a force, or a degree of velocity, or an

interval of time, must be ignorant of continuity ; this I have mentioned before in this

work, & also for this very reason I explained it very fully at the beginning of my

dissertation De Lege Continuitatis.

1 06. It may seem to some that at least a law of forces of this nature, & the curve °gb^cstt10?herappard
expressing it, which I gave in Fig. I, is very complicated, composite & irregular, being ent composite cha-
indeed made up of an immense number of arcs that are alternately attractive & repulsive, ^te[h°f t

& that these are joined together according to no definite plan ; & that it reduces to Of forces,
the same thing as obtained amongst the ancients, since with the Peripatetics separate
distinct qualities were invented for the several properties of bodies, & different substantial
forms for different species. Moreover there are some who add that repulsion & attraction
are kinds of forces that differ from one another ; & that it would be quite enough to
use only the latter, & to explain repulsion merely as a smaller attraction.

107. First of all, as regards the last objection, it is clear enough from what has been p^ssibie^o prove
directly proved in my Theory that the existence of repulsion has been rigorously demonstrated directly the exist-
in such a way that it cannot possibly be derived from the idea of a smaller attraction. For f^ce °f apart PUfrom
two particles of matter, if they were also the only particles in the universe, & approached attraction.

one another with some difference of velocity, would be bound to attain to an equality of
velocity on account of a force which could not possibly be derived from an attraction of

any kind,

H

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

tiva, & negativa.

Hinc nihu pbstare, Iogi Deinde vefo quod pertinet ad duas diversas species attractionis, & repulsionis ;

si diversi suit gene- ., . , ,. . ,^. r.r-ii-i i

ris; sed esse ejus- id quidem licet ita se haberet, m-[49j-hil sane obesset, cum positive argumento evmcatur
dem uti sunt posi- & repulsio. & attractio, uti vidimus; at id ipsum est omnino falsum. Utraque vis ad

. f . . . . ^ . . .

eandem pertinet speciem, cum altera respectu alterms negativa sit, & negativa a positivis
specie non differant. Alteram negativam esse respectu alterius, patet inde, quod tantum-
modo differant in directione, quae in altera est prorsus opposita direction! alterius ; in
altera enim habetur determinatio ad accessum, in altera ad recessum, & uti recessus, &
accessus sunt positivum, ac negativum ; ita sunt pariter & determinationes ad ipsos. Quod
autem negativum, & positivum ad eandem pertineant speciem, id sane patet vel ex eo
principio : magis, W minus non differunt specie. Nam a positive per continuam subtrac-
tionem, nimirum diminutionem, habentur prius minora positiva, turn zero, ac demum
negativa, continuando subtractionem eandem.

Probatio hujus a
progressu, & re-
gressu, in fluvio.

109. Id facile patet exemplis solitis. Eat aliquis contra fluvii directionem versus locum
aliquem superiori alveo proximum, & singulis minutis perficiat remis, vel vento too hexapedas,
dum a cursu fluvii retroagitur per hexapedas 40 ; is habet progressum hexapedarum 60
singulis minutis. Crescat autem continue impetus fluvii ita, ut retroagatur per 50, turn per
60, 70, 80, 90, 100, no, 120, &c. Is progredietur per 50, 40, 30, 20, 10, nihil ; turn
regredietur per 10, 20, quae erunt negativa priorum ; nam erat prius 100 — 50, 100 — 60,
100—70,100 — 80,100 — 90, turn 100 — 100=0,100 — no, = — 10, 100 — 120 = —20, et ita
porro. Continua imminutione, sive subtractione itum est a positivis in negativa, a
progressu ad regressum, in quibus idcirco eadem species mansit, non duae diversae.

Probatio ex Alge-
bra, & Geometria :
applicatio ad omnes
quantitates varia-
biles.

An habeatur trans-
itus e positivis in
negativa ; investi-
gatio ex sola curv-
arum natura.

B

FHN

MAC

FIG. ii.

i to. Idem autem & algebraicis formulis, & geometricis lineis satis manifeste ostenditur.
Sit formula 10— x, & pro x ponantur valores 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, n, 12, &c. ; valor formulae
exhibebit 4, 3, 2, I, o, — I, — 2, &c., quod eodem redit, ubi erat superius in progressu, &
regressu, qui exprimerentur simulper formulam 10— x. Eadem ilia formula per continuam
mutationem valoris x migrat e valore positive in negativum, qui aeque ad eandem formulam
pertinent. Eodem pacto in Geometria in fig.
u,siduae lineae MN, OP referantur invicem
per ordinatas AB, CD, &c. parallelas inter se,
secent autem se in E ; continue motu ipsius
ordinatae a positive abitur in negativum, mutata
directione AB, CD, quae hie habentur pro
positivis, in FG, HI, post evanescentiam in E.
Ad eandem lineam continuam OEP aeque
pertinet omnis ea ordinatarum series, nee est
altera linea, alter locus geometricus OE, ubi
ordinatae sunt positivae, ac EP, ubi sunt nega-
tivae. Jam vero variabilis quantitatis cujusvis
natura, & lex plerumque per formulam aliquam analyticam, semper per ordinatas ad lineam
aliquam exprimi potest ; si [50] enim singulis ejus statibus ducatur perpendicularis
respondens ; vertices omnium ejusmodi perpendicularium erunt utique ad lineam quandam
continuam. Si ea linea nusquam ad alteram abeat axis partem, si ea formula nullum valorem
negativum habeat ; ilia etiam quantitas semper positiva manebit. Sed si mutet latus linea,
vel formula valoris signum ; ipsa ilia quantitatis debebit itidem ejusmodi mutationem
habere. Ut autem a formulae, vel lineae exprimentis natura, & positione respectu axis
mutatio pendet ; ita mutatio eadem a natura quantitatis illius pendebit ; & ut nee duas
formulae, nee duae lineae speciei diversae sunt, quae positiva exhibent, & negativa ; ita nee in
ea quantitate duae erunt naturae, duae species, quarum altera exhibeat positiva, altera
negativa, ut altera progressus, altera regressus ; altera accessus, altera recessus ; & hie altera
attractiones, altera repulsiones exhibeat ; sed eadem erit, unica, & ad eandem pertinens
quantitatis speciem tota.

in. Quin immo hie locum habet argumentum quoddam, quo usus sum in dissertatione
De Lege Continuitatis, quo nimirum Theoria virium attractivarum, & repulsivarum pro
diversis distantiis, multo magis rationi consentanea evincitur, quam Theoria ^ virium
tantummodo attractivarum, vel tantummodo repulsivarum. Fingamus illud, nos ignorare
penitus, quodnam virium genus in Natura existat, an tantummodo attractivarum, vel
repulsivarum tantummodo, an utrumque simul : hac sane ratiocinatione ad earn perquisi-
tionem uti liceret. Erit utique aliqua linea continua, quae per suas ordinatas ad axem
exprimentem distantias, vires ipsas determinabit, & prout ipsa axem secuerit, vel non

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

99

108. Next, as regards attraction & repulsion being of different species, even if it Hence it does not
were a fact that they were so, it would not matter in the slightest degree, since by rigorous Satdifferenthkmds!
argument the existence of both attraction & repulsion is proved, as we have seen ; but but as a matter of
really the supposition is untrue. Both kinds of force belong to the same species ; for one same^kmdnusVas
is negative with regard to the other, & a negative does not differ in species from positives. a positive and a
That the one is negative with regard to the other is evident from the fact that they only negatlve are so-
differ in direction, the direction of one being exactly the opposite of the direction of the

other ; for in the one there is a propensity to approach, in the other a propensity to recede ;
& just as approach & recession are positive & negative, so also are the propensities
for these equally so. Further, that such a negative & a positive belong to the same species,
is quite evident from the principle the greater & the less are not different in kind. For
from a positive by continual subtraction, or diminution, we first obtain less positives, then
zero, & finally negatives, the same subtraction being continued throughout.

109. The matter is easily made clear by the usual illustrations. Suppose a man Demonstration by
to go against the current of a river to some place on the bank up-stream; & suppose "veTndretrogS
that he succeeds in doing, either by rowing or sailing, 100 fathoms a minute, whilst he motion on a river.
is carried back by the current of the river through 40 fathoms ; then he will get forward

a distance of 60 fathoms a minute. Now suppose that the strength of the current continually
increases in such a way that he is carried back first 50, then 60, 70, 80, 90, ipo, no, 120,
&c. fathoms per minute. His forward motion will be successively 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 fathoms
per minute, then nothing, & then he will be carried backward through 10, 20, &c. fathoms
a minute ; & these latter motions are the negatives of the former. For first of all we
had 100 — 50, 100 — 60, 100 — 70, 100 — 80, 100 — 90, then 100 — 100 (which = o),
then 100 — no (which = — 10), 100 — 120 (which = — 20), and so on. By a continual
diminution or subtraction we have passed from positives to negatives, from a progressive
to a retrograde motion ; & therefore in these there was a continuance of the same species,
and there were not two different species.

no. Further, the same thing is shown plainly enough by algebraical formulae, & Proof from algebra
by lines in geometry. Consider the formula 10 — x, & for x substitute the values, 6, pucatfon™^ Oy : a n
7, 8, 9, 10, n, 12, &c. ; then the value of the formula will give in succession 4, 3, 2, variable quantities.
I, o, — i, — 2, &c. ; & this comes to the same thing as we had above in the case of the
progressive & retrograde motion, which may be expressed by the formula 10 — x, all
together. This same formula passes, by a continuous change in the value of x, from a
positive value to a negative, which equally belong to the same formula. In the same
manner in geometry, in Fig. 1 1, if two lines MN, OP are referred to one another by ordinates
AB, CD, & also cut one another in E ; then by a continuous motion of the ordinate
itself it passes from positive to negative, the direction of AB, CD, which are here taken
to be positive, being changed to that of FG, HI, after evanescence at E. To the same
continuous line OEP belongs equally the whole of this series of ordinates ; & OE, where
the ordinates are positive, is not a different line, or geometrical locus from EP, where the
ordinates are negative. Now the nature of any variable quantity, & very frequently
also the law, can be expressed by an algebraical formula, & can always be expressed by
some line ; for if a perpendicular be drawn to correspond to each separate state of the
quantity, the vertices of all perpendiculars so drawn will undoubtedly form some continuous
line. If the line never passes over to the other side of the axis, if the formula has no negative
value, then also the quantity will always remain positive. But if the line changes side,
or the formula the sign of its value, then the quantity itself must also have a change of the
same kind. Further, as the change depends on the nature of the formula & the line
expressing it, & its position with respect to the axis ; so also the same change will depend
on the nature of the quantity ; & just as there are not two formulas, or two lines of
different species to represent the positives & the negatives, so also there will not be in the
quantity two natures, or two species, of which the one yields positives & the other negatives,
as the one a progressive & the other a retrograde motion, the one approach & the other
recession, & in the matter under consideration the one will give attractions & the other
repulsions. But it will be one & the same nature & wholly belonging to the same
spec es of quantity.

in. Lastly, this is the proper place for me to bring forward an argument that I used whether there can

i i . • T\ T /-. -T.r. ,..,!.. , .be a transition

in the dissertation De Lege Continmtatis ; by it indeed it is proved that a theory of attractive {rom positive to
& repulsive forces for different distances is far more reasonable than one of attractive negative ; mves-
forces only, or of repulsive forces only. Let us imagine that we are quite ignorant of the of8the°nature of the
kind of forces that exist in Nature, whether they are only attractive or only repulsive, or curve only,
both ; it would be allowable to use the following reasoning to help us to investigate the
matter. Without doubt there will be some continuous line which, by means of ordinates
drawn from it to an axis representing distances, will determine the forces ; & according

ioo

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

cent.qi

secuerit ; vires erunt alibi attractive, alibi repulsivae ; vel ubique attractive tantum, aut
repulsive tantum. Videndum igitur, an sit ration! consentaneum magis, lineam ejus
naturae, & positionis censere, ut axem alicubi secet, an ut non secet.

Transitum deduci U2. Inter rectas axem rectilineum unica parallela ducta per quod vis datum punctum

sint 0>curvse, Pquas non secatj omnes alie numero infinitae secant alicubi. Curvarum nulla est, quam infinitae
recte secent, quam numero rectae secare non possint ; & licet aliquae curvae ejus naturae sint, ut eas aliquae rectae
non secent ; tamen & eas ipsas aliae infinite numero recte secant, & infinite numero curve,
quod Geometrie sublimioris peritis est notissimum, sunt ejus nature, ut nulla prorsus sit
recta linea, a qua possint non secari. Hujusmodi ex. gr. est parabola ilia, cujus ordinate
sunt in ratione triplicata abscissarum. Quare infinite numero curve sunt, & infinite
numero rectae, que sectionem necessario habeant, pro quavis recta, que non habeat, & nulla
est curva, que sectionem cum axe habere non possit. Ergo inter casus possibles multo
plures sunt ii, qui sectionem admittunt, quam qui ea careant ; adeoque seclusis rationibus
aliis omnibus, & sola casuum probabilitate, & rei [51] natura abstracte considerata, multo
magis rationi consentaneum est, censere lineam illam, que vires exprimat, esse unam ex iis,
que axem secant, quam ex iis, que non secant, adeoque & ejusmodi esse virium legem, ut
attractiones, & repulsiones exhibeat simul pro diversis distantiis, quam ut alteras tantummodo
referat ; usque adeo rei natura considerata non solam attractionem, vel solam repulsionem,
sed utramque nobis objicit simul.

punctis

a recta.

secabiles

Ulterior perqui- u* ged eodem argumento licet ultenus quoque progredi, & primum etiam difficultatis

sitio: curvarum J , ° o -j • • • • • i •

genera : quo aiti- caput amovere, quod a sectionum, & idcirco etiam arcuum jam attractivorum, jam repulsi-
ores, eo in piuribus vorum multiplicitate desumitur. Curvas lineas Geometre in quasdam classes dividunt

uni •, .........

°Pe anaiyseos, que earum naturam expnmit per mas, quas Analyste appellant, equationes,
& que ad varies gradus ascendunt. Aequationes primi gradus exprimunt rectas ; equati-
ones secundi gradus curvas primi generis ; equationes tertii gradus curvas secundi generis,
atque ita porro ; & sunt curve, que omnes gradus transcendunt finite Algebre, & que
idcirco dicuntur transcendentes. Porro illud demonstrant Geometre in Analysi ad
Geometriam applicata, lineas, que exprimuntur per equationem primi gradus, posse
secari a recta in unico puncto ; que equationem habent gradus secundi, tertii, & ita porro,
secari posse a recta in punctis duobus, tribus, & ita porro : unde fit, ut curva noni, vel
nonagesimi noni generis secari possit a recta in punctis decem, vel centum.

itidem

sum plures in eo-

Jam vero curvae primi generis sunt tantummodo tres conice sectiones, ellipis,
parabola, hyperbola, adnumerato ellipsibus etiam circulo, que quidem veteribus quoque
Geometris innotuerunt. Curvas secundi generis enumeravit Newtonus omnium primus,
& sunt circiter octoginta ; curvarum generis tertii nemo adhuc numerum exhibuit accura-
tum, & mirum sane, quantus sit is ipse illarum numerus. Sed quo altius assurgit curve
genus, eo plures in eo genere sunt curve, progressione ita in immensum crescente, ut ubi
aliquanto altius ascenderit genus ipsum, numerus curvarum omnem superet humane
imaginationis vim. Idem nimirum ibi accidit, quod in combinationibus terminorum, de
quibus supra mentionem fecimus, ubi diximus a 24 litterulis omnes exhiberi voces linguarum
omnium, & que fuerunt, aut sunt, & que esse possunt.

Deductio inde piu- jjr Inde iam pronum est argumentationem hujusmodi instituere. Numerus

rimarum mtersec- .. J .. . ,..J..

tionum, axis, & linearum, que axem secare possint in punctis quamplunmis, est in immensum major earum
curvae exprimentis numero, quae non possint, nisi in paucis, vel unico : igitur ubi agitur de linea exprimente
legem virium, ei, qui nihil aliunde sciat, in immensum probabilius erit, ejusmodi lineam
esse ex prio-[52]-rum genere unam, quam ex genere posteriorum, adeoque ipsam virium
naturam plurimos requirere transitus ab attractionibus ad repulsiones, & vice versa, quam
paucos, vel nullum.

- Sed omissa ista conjecturali argumentatione quadam, formam curve exprimentis

simpiicem: in quo vires positive argumento a phenomenis Nature deducto nos supra determinavimus cum
plurimis intersectionibus, que transitus ejusmodi quamplurimos exhibeant. Nee ejusmodi
curva debet esse e piuribus arcubus temere compaginata, & compacta : diximus enim,

11 *

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 101

as it will cut the axis, or will not, the forces will be either partly attractive & partly
repulsive, or everywhere only attractive or only repulsive. Accordingly it is to be seen •
if it is more reasonable to suppose that a line of this nature & position cuts the axis anywhere,
or does not.

112. Amongst straight lines there is only one, drawn parallel to the rectilinear axis, intersection is to
through any given point that does not cut the axis; all the rest (infinite in number) will the factThat tfhere
cut it somewhere. There is no curve that an infinite number of straight lines cannot cut ; are more lines that
& although there are some curves of such a nature that some straight lines do not cut them, thL^es^hat^o
yet there are an infinite number of other straight lines that do cut these curves ; & there not.

are an infinite number of curves, as is well-known to those versed in higher geometry, of
such a nature that there is absolutely not a single straight line by which they cannot be
cut. An example of this kind of curve is that parabola, in which the ordinates are in the
triplicate ratio of the abscissae. Hence there are an infinite number of curves & an
infinite number of straight lines which necessarily have intersection, corresponding to any
straight line that has not ; & there is no curve that cannot have intersection with an
axis. Therefore amongst the cases that are possible, there are far more curves that admit
intersection than those that are free from it ; hence, putting all other reasons on one side,
& considering only the probability of the cases & the nature of the matter on its own
merits, it is far more reasonable to suppose that the line representing the forces is one of
those, which cut the axis, than one of those that do not cut it. Thus the law of forces
is such that it yields both attractions & repulsions (for different distances), rather than
such that it deals with either alone. Thus far the nature of the matter has been considered,
with the result that it presents to us, not attraction alone, nor repulsion alone, but both of
these together.

113. But we can also proceed still further adopting the same line of argument, & Further investiga-
first of all remove the chief point of the difficulty, that is derived from the multiplicity S^L.^JILhi

ri* */i i i p i i i • curves , nit, iijgiicr

of the intersections, & consequently also of the arcs alternately attractive & repulsive, their order, the

Geometricians divide curves into certain classes by the help of analysis, which expresses wWcV^a ^teaight

their nature by what the analysts call equations ; these equations rise to various degrees, line can cut them.

Equations of the first degree represent straight lines, equations of the second degree represent

curves of the first class, equations of the third degree curves of the second class, & so on.

There are also curves which transcend all degrees of finite algebra, & on that account

these are called transcendental curves. Further, geometricians prove, in analysis applied

to geometry, that lines that are expressed by equations of the first degree can be cut by a

straight line in one point only ; those that have equations of the second, third, & higher

degrees can be cut by a straight line in two, three, & more points respectively. Hence

it comes about that a curve of the ninth, or the ninety-ninth class can be cut by a straight

line in ten, or in a hundred, points.

114. Now there are only three curves of the first class, namely the conic sections, the As the class gets
parabola, the ellipse & the hyperbola; the circle is included under the name of ellipse; gh "

of that
& these three curves were known to the ancient geometricians also. Newton was the class becomes im-

first of all persons to enumerate the curves of the second class, & there are about eighty mensely greater.

of them. Nobody hitherto has stated an exact number for the curves of the third class ;

& it is really wonderful how great is the number of these curves. Moreover, the higher

the class of the curve becomes, the more curves there are in that class, according to a

progression that increases in such immensity that, when the class has risen but a little higher,

the number of curves will altogether surpass the fullest power of the human imagination.

Indeed the same thing happens in this case as in combinations of terms ; we mentioned

the latter above, when we said that by means of 24 little letters there can be

expressed all the words of all languages that ever have been, or are, or can be in

the future.

115. From what has been said above we are led to set up the following line of argument. Hence we deduce
The number of lines that can cut the axis in very many points is immensely greater than that there. are ^

, , , .... ' , ' r. . . ' f> many intersections

the number of those that can cut it in a few points only, or in a single point. Hence, when Of the axis and the
the line representing the law of forces is in question, it will appear to one. who otherwise ?urve representing

i i • i • i • • • i r i 111 , forces.

knows nothing about its nature, that it is immensely more probable that the curve is of
the first kind than that it is of the second kind ; & therefore that the nature of the forces
must be such as requires a very large number of transitions from attractions to repulsions
& back again, rather than a small number or none at all.

116. But, omitting this somewhat conjectural line of reasoning, we have already it may be that the
determined, by what has been said above, the form of the curve representing forces by a j|£™? I^SSlJ8

. ' rxr /iii simple , tnecuarac-

ngorous argument derived trom the phenomena of Nature, & that there are very many teristic of simplicity
intersections which represent just as many of these transitions. Further, a curve of this mcurves-

102

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

notum esse Geometris, infinita esse curvarum genera, quae ex ipsa natura sua debeant axem
in plurimis secare punctis, adeoque & circa ipsum sinuari ; sed praeter hanc generalem
responsionem desumptam a generali curvarum natura, in dissertatione De Lege Firium in
Natura existentium ego quidem directe demonstravi, curvam illius ipsius formae, cujusmodi
ea est, quam in fig. i exhibui, simplicem esse posse, non ex arcubus diversarum curvarum
compositam. Simplicem autem ejusmodi curvam affirmavi esse posse : earn enim simplicem
appello, quae tota est uniformis naturae, quae in Analysi exponi possit per aequationem non
resolubilem in plures, e quarum multiplicatione eadem componatur cujuscunque demum
ea curva sit generis, quotcunque habeat flexus, & contorsiones. Nobis quidem altiorum
generum curvae videntur minus simplices ; quh nimirum nostrae humanae menti, uti pluribus
ostendi in dissertatione De Maris Aestu, & in Stayanis Supplementis, recta linea videtur
omnium simplicissima, cujus congruentiam in superpositione intuemur mentis oculis
evidentissime, & ex qua una omnem nos homines nostram derivamus Geometriam ; ac
idcirco, quae lineae a recta recedunt magis, & discrepant, illas habemus pro compositis, &
magis ab ea simplicitate, quam nobis confinximus, recedentibus. At vero lineae continuae,
& uniformis naturae omnes in se ipsis sunt aeque simplices ; & aliud mentium genus, quod
cujuspiam ex ipsis proprietatem aliquam aeque evidenter intueretur, ac nos intuemur
congruentiam rectarum, illas maxime simplices esse crederet curvas lineas, ex ilia earum
proprietate longe alterius Geometrise sibi elementa conficeret, & ad illam ceteras referret
lineas, ut nos ad rectam referimus ; quas quidem mentes si aliquam ex. gr. parabolae pro-
prietatem intime perspicerent, atque intuerentur, non illud quaarerent, quod nostri
Geometrae quaerunt, ut parabolam rectificarent, sed, si ita loqui fas est, ut rectam
parabolarent.

Problema continens 1 1 7. Et quidem analyseos ipsius profundiorem cognitionem requirit ipsa investigatio

naturam curvaeana- aequationis, qua possit exprimi curva ems formae, quae meam exhibet virium legem.

lytice expnmendam. „/! j- • • 11 ji -i

Quamobrem hie tantummodo exponam conditiones, quas ipsa curva habere debet, & quibus
aequatio ibi inventa satis facere [53] debeat. (c) Continetur autem id ipsum num. 75,
illius dissertationis, ubi habetur hujusmodi Problema : Invenire naturam curvce, cujus
abscissis exprimentibus distantias, ordinal exprimant vires, mutatis distantiis utcunque
mutatas, y in datis quotcunque limitibus transeuntes e repulsivis in attractivas, ac ex attractivis
in repulsivas, in minimis autem distantiis repulsivas, W ita crescentes, ut sint pares extinguendce
cuicunque velocitati utcunque magnce. Proposito problemate illud addo : quoniam posuimus
mutatis distantiis utcunque mutatas, complectitur propositio etiam rationem quee ad rationem
reciprocam duplicatam distantiarum accedat, quantum libuerit, in quibusdam satis magnis
distantiis.

Conditiones ejus
problematis.

1 18. His propositis numero illo 75, sequenti numero propono sequentes sex conditiones,
quae requirantur, & sufficiant ad habendam curvam, quse quaeritur. Primo : ut sit regularis,
ac simplex, & non composita ex aggregate arcuum diversarum curvarum. Secundo : ut secet
axem C'AC figures i. tantum in punctis quibusdam datis ad binas distantias AE', AE ; AG',
AG ; y ita porro cequales (d) bine, y inde. Tertio : ut singulis abscissis respondeant singulcs
ordinatcf. (e) Quarto : ut sumptis abscissis cequalibus hinc, y inde ab A, respondeant ordinal*

(c) Qui velit ipsam rei determinationem videre, poterit hie in fine, ubi Supphmentorum, § 3. exhibebitur solutio
problematis, qua in memorata dissertatione continetur a num. 77. ad no. Sed W numerorum ordo, & figurarum
mutabitur, ut cum reliquis hujusce operis cohtereat.

Addetur prieterea eidem §. postremum scholium pertinens ad qu<sstionem agitatam ante has aliquot annos Parisiis ;
an vis mutua inter materite particulas debeat omnino exprimi per solam aliquam distantiee potenttam, an possit per
aliquam ejus functionem ; W constabit, posse utique per junctionem, ut hie ego presto, qute uti superiore numero de curvts
est dictum, est in se eeque simplex etiam, ubi nobis potentias ad ejus expressionem adhibentibus videatur admodum
composita.

(d) Id, ut y quarta conditio, requiritur, ut curva utrinque sit sui similis, quod ipsam magis uniformem reddit ;
quanquam de illo crure, quod est citra asymptotum AB, nihil est, quod soliciti simus ; cum ob vim repulsivam imminutis
distantiis ita in infinitum excrescentem, non possit abscissa distantiam exprimens unquam evadere zero, W abire in
negativam.

(e) Nam singulis distantiis singulte vires respondent.

A THEORY -OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 103

kind is not bound to be built up by connecting together a number of independent arcs.
For, as I said, it is well known to Geometricians that there are an infinite number of classes
of curves that, from their very nature, must cut the axis in a very large number of points,
& therefore also wind themselves about it. Moreover, in addition to this general answer
to the objector, derived from the general nature of curves, in my dissertation De Lege
Firium in Natura existentium, I indeed proved in a straightforward manner that a curve,
of the form that I have given in Fig. i, might be simple & not built up of arcs of several
different curves. Further, I asserted that a simple curve of this kind was perfectly feasible ;
for I call a curve simple, when the whole of it is of one uniform nature. In analysis, this
can be expressed by an equation that is not capable of being resolved into several other
equations, such that the former is formed from the latter by multiplication ; & that too,
no matter of what class the curve may be, or how many flexures or windings it may have.
It is true that the curves of higher classes seem to us to be less simple ; this is so because,
as I have shown in several places in the dissertation De Marts Aestu, & the supplements
to Stay's Philosophy, a straight line seems to our human mind to be the simplest of all
lines ; for we get a real clear mental perception of the congruence on superposition in the
case of a straight line, & from this we human beings form the whole of our geometry.
On this account, the more that lines depart from straightness & the more they differ,
the more we consider them to be composite & to depart from that simplicity that we have
set up as our standard. But really all lines that are continuous & of uniform nature
are just as simple as one another. Another kind of mind, which might form an equally
clear mental perception of some property of any one of these curves, as we do the congruence
of straight lines, might believe these curves to be the simplest of all & from that property
of these curves build up the elements of a far different geometry, referring all other curves
to that one, just as we compare them with a straight line. Indeed, these minds, if they
noticed & formed an extremely clear perception of some property of, say, the parabola,
would not seek, as our geometricians do, to rectify the parabola ; they would endeavour,
if one may use the words, to parabolify a straight line.

1 17. The investigation of the equation, by which a curve of the form that will represent pT°bl!Jn .

' i ~ • j' i i j f i • • ir 1T71. r "*™ the analytical

my law of forces can be expressed, requires a deeper knowledge 01 analysis itselt. Wnereiore expression of the

I will here do no more than set out the necessary requirements that the curve must fulfil nature of the curve.

& those that the equation thereby discovered must satisfy. (c) It is the subject of Art. 75

of the dissertation De Lege Firium, where the following problem is proposed. Required

to find the nature of the curve, whose abscissa represent distances & whose ordinates represent

forces that are changed as the distances are changed in any manner, y pass from attractive

forces to repulsive, & from repulsive to attractive, at any given number of limit-points ; further,

the forces are repulsive at extremely small distances and increase in such a manner that they

are capable of destroying any velocity, however great it may be. To the problem as there

proposed I now add the following : — As we have used the words are changed as the distances

are changed in any manner, the proposition includes also the ratio that approaches as nearly

as you please to the reciprocal ratio of the squares of the distances, whenever the distances are

sufficiently great.

1 1 8. In addition to what is proposed in this Art. 75, I set forth in the article that The 0* of
follows it the following six conditions ; these are the necessary and sufficient conditions

for determining the curve that is required.

(i) The curve is regular & simple, & not compounded of a number of arcs of different curves.

(ii) It shall cut the axis C'AC of Fig. I, only in certain given points, whose distances,
AE',AE, AG', AG, and so on, are equal (<t) in pairs on each side of A [see p. 80].

(iii) To each abscissa there shall correspond one ordinate y one only, (f)

(iv) To equal abscisses, taken one on each side of A, there shall correspond equal ordinates.

(c) Anyone who desires to see the solution of the -problem will be able to do seat the end of this work; it will be
found in § 3 of the Supplements ; it is the solution of the problem, as it was given in the dissertation mentioned above,
from Art. 77 to no. But here both the numbering of the articles W of the diagrams have been changed, so as to
agree with the rest of the work. In addition, at the end of this section, there will be found a final note dealing
with a question that was discussed some years ago in Paris. Namely, whether the mutual force between particles of mat-
ter is bound to be expressible by some one power of the distance only, or by some function of the distance. It will be
evident that at any rate it may be expressible by a function as I here assert ; y that function, as has been stated in the
article above, is perfectly simple in itself also ; whereas, if we adhere to an expression by means of powers, the curve will
seem to be altogether complex.

(d) This, y the fourth condition too, is required to make the curve symmetrical, thus giving it greater uniformity ;
although we are not concerned with the branch on the other side of the asymptote AB at all. For, on account of the
repulsive force at very small distances increasing indefinitely in such a manner as postulated, it is impossible that the
abscissa that represents the distance should ever become zero y then become negative.

(e) For to each distance one force, & and only one, corresponds.

104

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

czquales. Quinto : ut babeant rectam AB pro asymptoto, area asymptotica BAED existente (£)
infinita. Sexto : ut arcus binis quibuscunque intersectionibus terminati possint variari, ut
libuerit, fcf? ad quascunque distantias recedere ab axe C'AC, ac accedcre ad quoscunque quarum-
cunque curvarum arcus, quantum libuerit, eos secanda, vel tangendo, vel osculando ubicunque,
£ff quomodocunque libuerit.

soiutio IrTUattrac IS4] IT9- Verum quod ad multiplicitatem virium pertinet, quas diversis jam Physici
tionem gravitatis nominibus appellant, illud hie etiam notari potest, si quis singulas seorsim considerare
velit, licere illud etiam, hanc curvam in se unicam per resolutionem virium cogitatione
nostra, atque fictione quadam, dividere in plures. Si ex. gr. quis velit considerare in materia
gravitatem generalem accurate reciprocam distantiarum quadratis ; poterit sane is describere
ex parte attractiva hyperbolam illam, quae habeat accurate ordinatas in ratione reciproca
duplicata distantiarum, quse quidem erit quaedam velut continuatio cruris VTS, turn singulis
ordinatis ag, dh curvae virium expressae in fig. I. adjungere ordinatas hujus novae hyperbolae
ad partes AB incipiendo a punctis curvae g, b, & eo pacto orietur nova quaedam curva, quae
versus partes pV coincidet ad sensum cum axe oC, in reliquis locis ab eo distabit, & contor-
quebitur etiam circa ipsum, si vertices F, K, O distiterint ab axe magis, quam distet ibidem
hyperbola ilia. Turn poterit dici, puncta omnia materiae habere gravitatem decrescentem
accurate in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum, & simul habere vim aliam expressam
ab ilia nova curva : nam idem erit, concipere simul hasce binas leges virium, ac illam
praecedentem unicam, & iidem effectus orientur.

Hujus posterioris
vis resolutio in alias
plures.

1 20. Eodem pacto haec nova curva potest dividi in alias duas, vel plures, concipiendo
aliam quamcunque vim, ut ut accurate servantem quasdam determinatas leges, sed simul
mutando curvam jam genitam, translatis ejus punctis per intervalla aequalia ordinatis
respondentibus novae legi ass.umptae. Hoc pacto habebuntur plures etiam vires diversae,
quod aliquando, ut in resolutione virium accidere diximus, inserviet ad faciliorem deter-
minationem effectuum, & ea erit itidem vera virium resolutio quaedam ; sed id omne erit
nostrae mentis partus quidam ; nam reipsa unica lex virium habebitur, quam in fig. I .
exposui, & quae ex omnibus ejusmodi legibus componetur.

Non obesse theo-
r i a m gravitatis ;

distantiis locum
non habet.

121. Quoniam autem hie mentio injecta est gravitatis decrescentis accurate in ratione
cujusiex1naminimis reciproca duplicata distantiarum ; cavendum, ne cui difficultatem aliquam pariat illud,
'"""m quod apud Physicos, & potissimum apud Astronomiae mechanicae cultores, habetur pro
comperto, gravitatem decrescere in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum accurate,
cum in hac mea Theoria lex virium discedat plurimum ab ipsa ratione reciproca duplicata
distantiarum. Inprimis in minoribus distantiis vis integra, quam in se mutuo exercent
particulae, omnino plurimum discrepat a gravitate, quae sit in ratione reciproca duplicata
distantiarum. Nam & vapores, qui tantam exercent vim ad se expandendos, repulsionem
habent utique in illis minimis distantiis a se invicem, non attractionem ; & ipsa attractio,
quae in cohaesione se prodit, est ilia quidem in immensum major, quam quae ex generali
gravitate consequitur ; cum ex ipsis Newtoni compertis attractio gravitati respondens [55]
in globes homogeneos diversarum diametrorum sit in eadem ratione, in qua sunt globorum
diametri, adeoque vis ejusmodi in exiguam particulam est eo minor gravitate corporum in
Terram, quo minor est diameter particulae diametro totius Terrae, adeoque penitus insen-
sibilis. Et idcirco Newtonus aliam admisit vim pro cohaesione, quae decrescat in ratione
majore, quam sit reciproca duplicata distantiarum ; & multi ex Newtonianis admiserunt

vim respondentem huic formulae -3 + -v cujus prior pars respectu posterioris sit in

immensum minor, ubi x sit in immensum major unitate assumpta ; sit vero major, ubi x
sit in immensum minor, ut idcirco in satis magnis distantiis evanescente ad sensum prima
parte, vis remaneat quam proxime in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum x, in minimis
vero distantiis sit quam proxime in ratione reciproca triplicata : usque adeo ne apud
Newtonianos quidem servatur omnino accurate ratio duplicata distantiarum.

EX

pianetarum
™

I22. Demonstravit quidem Newtonus, in ellipsibus planetariis, earn, quam Astronomi
q^ampro™ lineam apsidum nominant, & est axis ellipseos, habituram ingentem motum, si ratio virium
ime, non accurate. a reciproca duplicata distantiarum aliquanto magis aberret, cumque ad sensum quiescant

(f) Id requiritur, quia in Mecbanica demonstrator, aream curves, cujus abscissa fxprimant distantias, 13 ordinatx
vires, exprimere incrementum, vel decrementum quadrati velocitatis : quare ut illte vires sint pares extinguendte veloci-
tati cuivis utcunque magna, debet ilia area esse omni finita major.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 105

(v) The straight line AB shall be an asymptote, and the asymptotic area BAED shall be
infinite. (f)

(vi) The arcs lying between any two intersections may vary to any extent, may recede to any
distances whatever from the axis C AC, and approximate to any arcs of any curves to any degree
of closeness, cutting them, or touching them, or osculating them, at any points and in any manner.

119. Now, as regards the multiplicity of forces which at the present time physicists call Resolution of the
by different names, it can also here be observed that, if anyone wants to consider one of these £Uj^f of N^wtonUn
separately, the curve though it is of itself quite one-fold can yet be divided into several attraction of
parts by a sort of mental & fictitious resolution of the forces. Thus, for instance, if f^fother1 force*1 d
anyone wishes to consider universal gravitation of matter exactly reciprocal to the squares
of the distances ; he can indeed describe on the attractive side the hyperbola which has
its ordinates accurately in the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances, & this will be
as it were a continuation of the branch VTS. Then he can add on to every ordinate, such
as ag, dh, the ordinates of this new hyperbola, in the direction of AB, starting in each case
from points on the curve, as g,h ; & in this way there will be obtained a fresh curve, which
for the part pV will approximately coincide with the axis 0C, & for the remainder will
recede from it & wind itself about it, if the vertices F,K,O are more distant from the
axis than the corresponding point on the hyperbola. Then it can be stated that all points
of matter have gravitation accurately decreasing in the inverse square of the distance,
together with another force represented by this new curve. For it comes to the same
thing to think of these two laws of forces acting together as of the single law already
given ; & the results that arise will be the same also.

1 20. In the same manner this new curve can be divided into two others, or several The resolution of
others, by considering some other force, in some way or other accurately obeying certain ^o several other
fixed laws, & at the same time altering the curve just obtained by translating the points of it forces.
through intervals equal to the ordinates corresponding to the new law that has been taken.
In this manner several different forces will be obtained ; & this will be sometimes useful,
as we mentioned that it would be in resolution of forces, for determining their effects more
readily ; & will be a sort of true resolution of forces. But all this will be as it were only
a conception of our mind ; for, in reality, there is a single law of forces, & that is the one
which I gave in Fig. i, & it will be the compounded resultant of all such forces as the above.

121. Moreover, since I here make mention of gravitation decreasing accurately in the The.. t.heor.y °*

, r11. .. 111 1111 gravitation is not

inverse ratio ot the squares ot the distances, it is to be remarked that no one should make in opposition ; this

any difficulty over the fact that, amongst physicists & more especially those who deal with l!J^0'Hd°tesv not holn

celestial mechanics, it is considered as an established fact that gravitation decreases accurately distances.

in the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances, whilst in my Theory the law of forces

is very different from this ratio. Especially, in the case of extremely small distances, the

whole force, which the particles exert upon one another, will differ very much in every

case from the force of gravity, if that is supposed to be inversely proportional to the

squares of these distances. For, in the case of gases, which exercise such a mighty

force of self-expansion, there is certainly repulsion at those very small distances from one

another, & not attraction ; again, the attraction that arises in cohesion is immensely

greater than it ought to be according to the law of universal gravitation. Now, from the

results obtained by Newton, the attraction corresponding to gravitation in homogeneous

spheres of different diameters varies as the diameters of the spheres ; & therefore this

kind of force for the case of a tiny particle is as small in proportion to the gravitation of

bodies to the Earth as the diameter of the particle is small in proportion to the diameter

of the whole Earth ; & is thus insensible altogether. Hence Newton admitted another

force in the case of cohesion, decreasing in a greater ratio than the inverse square of the

distances ; also many of the followers of Newton have admitted a force corresponding to

the formula, a'x3 + b'x2 ; in this the first term is immensely less than the second, when x

is immensely greater than some distance assumed as unit distance ; & immensely greater,

when x is immensely less. By this means, at sufficiently great distances the first part

practically vanishes & the force remains very approximately in the inverse ratio of the squares

of the distances x ; whilst, at very small distances, it is very nearly in the inverse ratio

of the cubes of the distances. Thus indeed, not even amongst the followers of Newton has

the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances been altogether rigidly adhered to.

122. Now Newton proved, in the case of planetary elliptic orbits, that that which The law follows
Astronomers call the apsidal line, i.e., the axis of the ellipse, would have a very great motion, not7

,

if the ratio of the forces varied to any great extent from the inverse ratio of the squares from the apheiia of
of the distances ; & since as far as could be observed the lines of apses were stationary

(f) This is required because in Mechanics it is shown that the area of a curve, whose abscissa r'present distances
y ordinates forces, represents the increase or decrease of the square of the velocity. Hence in order that the forces
should be capable of destroying any velocity however great, this area must be greater than any finite area.

io6 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

in earum orbitis apsidum linese, intulit, earn rationem observari omnino in gravitate. At
id nequaquam evincit, accurate servari illam legem, sed solum proxime, neque inde ullum
efficax argumentum contra meam Theoriam deduci potest. Nam inprimis nee omnino
quiescunt illae apsidum lineae, sive, quod idem est, aphelia planetarum, sed motu exiguo
quidem, at non insensibili prorsus, moventur etiam respectu fixarum, adeoque motu non
tantummodo apparente, sed vero. Tribuitur is motus perturbationi virium ortae ex mutua
planetarum actione in se invicem ; at illud utique hue usque nondum demonstratum est,
ilium motum accurate respondere actionibus reliquorum planetarum agentium in ratione
reciproca duplicata distantiarum ; neque enim adhuc sine contemptibus pluribus, &
approximationibus a perfectione, & exactitudine admodum remotis solutum est problema,
quod appellant, trium corporum, quo quasratur motus trium corporum in se mutuo
agentium in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum, & utcunque projectorum, ac illae
ipsae adhuc admodum imperfectae solutiones, quae prolatae hue usque sunt, inserviunt
tantummodo particularibus quibusdam casibus, ut ubi unum corpus sit maximum, &
remotissimum, quemadmodum Sol, reliqua duo admodum minora & inter se proxima, ut
est Luna, ac Terra, vel remota admodum a majore, & inter se, ut est Jupiter, & Saturnus.
Hinc nemo hucusque accuratum instituit, aut etiam instituere potuit calculum pro actione
perturbativa omnium planetarum, quibus si accedat actio perturbativa cometarum, qui,
nee scitur, quam multi sint, nee quam longe abeant ; multo adhuc magis evidenter patebit,
nullum inde confici posse argumentum [56] pro ipsa penitus accurata ratione reciproca
duplicata distantiarum.

I23- Clairautius quidem in schediasmate ante aliquot annos impresso, crediderat, ex
autem hanc legem ipsis motibus Kneje apsidum Lunae colligi sensibilem recessum a ratione reciproca duplicata
auantum iftmerit[m distantiae, & Eulerus in dissertatione De Aberrationibus Jovis, W Saturni, quas premium
retulit ab Academia Parisiensi an. 1748, censuit, in ipso Jove, & Saturno haberi recessum
admodum sensibilem ab ilia ratione ; sed id quidem ex calculi defectu non satis product!
sibi accidisse Clairautius ipse agnovit, ac edidit ; & Eulero aliquid simile fortasse accidit :
nee ullum habetur positivum argumentum pro ingenti recessu gravitatis generalis a ratione
duplicata distantiarum in distantia Lunae, & multo magis in distantia planetarum. Vero
nee ullum habetur argumentum positivum pro ratione ita penitus accurata, ut discrimen
sensum omnem prorsus effugiat. At & si id haberetur ; nihil tamen pati posset inde
Theoria mea ; cum arcus ille meae curvae postremus VT possit accedere, quantum libuerit,
ad arcum illius hyperbolae, quae exhibet legem gravitatis reciprocam quadratorum dis-
tantiae, ipsam tangendo, vel osculando in punctis quotcunque, & quibuscunque ; adeoque
ita possit accedere, ut discrimen in iis majoribus distantiis sensum omnem effugiat, &
effectus nullum habeat sensibile discrimen ab effectu, qui responderet ipsi legi gravitatis ;
si ea accurate servaret proportionem cum quadratis distantiarum reciproce sumptis.

Difficuitas a Mau- 124. Nee vero quidquam ipsi meae virium Theorias obsunt meditationes Maupertuisii,

tionemaxfma^Nlw- ingeniosae illae quidem, sed meo judicio nequaquam satis conformes Natune legibus circa

tonianae legis. legem virium decrescentium in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum, cujus ille perfec-

tiones quasdam persequitur, ut illam, quod in hac una integri globi habeant eandem virium

legem, quam singulae particulae. Demonstravit enim Newtonus, globos, quorum singuli

paribus a centre distantiis homogenei sint, & quorum particulae minimae se attrahant in

ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum, se itidem attrahere in eadem ratione distantiarum

reciproca duplicata. Ob hasce perfectiones hujus Theoriae virium ipse censuit hanc legem

reciprocam duplicatam distantiarum ab Auctore Naturae selectam fuisse, quam in Natura

esse vellet.

Prima responsio : 125. At mihi quidem inprimis nee unquam placuit, nee placebit sane unquam in

n!^Jf 8Ts^rwt8 investieatione Naturae causarum fmalium usus, quas tantummodo ad meditationem quandam,

onmcs, *x jjcricui~ o f i • i • t XT 1*1* * "VT

iones, ac seiigi et- contemplationemque, usui esse posse abitror, ubi leges JNaturse aliunde innotuennt. JNam
^J$£L*£5* nee perfectiones omnes innotescere nobis possunt, qui intimas rerum naturas nequaquam

III grH.ilclIU pcrlcC~ *• f . * a C

tionum. inspicimus, sed externas tantummodo propnetates quasdam agnoscimus, & lines omnes,

quos Naturae Auctor sibi potuit [57] proponere, ac proposuit, dum Mundum conderet,

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 107

in the orbits of each, he deduced that the ratio of the inverse square of the distances was
exactly followed in the case of gravitation. But he only really proved that that law was
very approximately followed, & not that it was accurately so ; nor from this can any
valid argument against my Theory be brought forward. For, in the first place these lines
of apses, or what comes to the same thing, the aphelia of the planets are not quite stationary ;
but they have some motion, slight indeed but not quite insensible, with respect to the fixed
stars, & therefore move not only apparently but really. This motion is attributed to
the perturbation of forces which arises from the mutual action of the planets upon one
another. But the fact remains that it has never up till now been proved that this motion
exactly corresponds with the actions of the rest of the planets, where this is in accordance
with the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances. For as yet the problem of three bodies,
as they call it, has not been solved except by much omission of small quantities & by
adopting approximations that are very far from truth and accuracy ; in this problem is
investigated the motion of three bodies acting mutually upon one another in the inverse
ratio of the squares of the distances, & projected in any manner. Moreover, even these
still only imperfect solutions, such as up till now have been published, hold good only
in certain particular cases ; such as the case in which one of the bodies is very large & at
a very great distance, the Sun for instance, whilst the other two are quite small in comparison
& very near one another, as are the Earth and the Moon, or at a large distance from the
greater & from one another as well, as Jupiter & Saturn. Hence nobody has hitherto
made, nor indeed could anybody make, an accurate calculation of the disturbing influence
of all the other planets combined. If to this is added the disturbing influence of the comets,
of which we neither know the number, nor how far off they are ; it will be still more evident
that from this no argument can be built up in favour of a perfectly exact observance of
the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances.

123. Clairaut indeed, in a pamphlet printed several years ago, asserted his belief that The same thing is
he had obtained from the motions of the line of apses for the Moon a sensible discrepancy J? ^ ^duced from

, , . r i i • AIT--I • i • i • • r>^r • • T the rest of astro-

from the inverse square of the distance. Also Euler, in his dissertation De Aberratiombus nomy ; moreover
Jovis, y Saturni, which carried off the prize given by the Paris Academy, considered that thls Iaw of .mi1e

•/, ,. T . „ <-, , r ° . ' .. , ,. *', can approximate

in the case of Jupiter & Saturn there was quite a sensible discrepancy from that ratio, to the other as

But Clairaut found out, & proclaimed the fact, that his result was indeed due to a defect nearly as is desired.

in his calculation which had not been carried far enough ; & perhaps something similar

happened in Euler's case. Moreover, there is no positive argument in favour of a large

discrepancy from the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances for universal gravitation

in the case of the distance of the Moon, & still more in the case of the distances of the planets.

Neither is there any rigorous argument in favour of the ratio being so accurately observed

that the difference altogether eludes all observation. But even if this were the case, my

Theory would not suffer in the least because of it. For the last arc VT of my curve can

be made to approximate as nearly as is desired to the arc of the hyperbola that represents

the law of gravitation according to the inverse squares of the distances, touching the latter,

or osculating it in any number of points in any positions whatever ; & thus the approximation

can be made so close that at these relatively great distances the difference will be altogether

unnoticeable, & the effect will not be sensibly different from the effect that would

correspond to the law of gravitation, even if that exactly conformed to the inverse ratio

of the squares of the distances.

124. Further, there is nothing really to be objected to my Theory on account of the Objection arising
meditations of Maupertuis ; these are certainly most ingenious, but in my opinion in no p°r™ction fccord*
way sufficiently in agreement with the laws of Nature. Those meditations of his, I mean, ing to Maupertuis,
with regard to the law of forces decreasing in the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances ; j^fw»the Newtoman
for which law he strives to adduce certain perfections as this, that in this one law alone

complete spheres have the same law of forces as the separate particles of which they are
formed. For Newton proved that spheres, each of which have equal densities at equal
distances from the centre, & of which the smallest particles attract one another in the
inverse ratio of the squares of the distances, themselves also attract one another in the same
ratio of the inverse squares of the distances. On account of such perfections as these in
this Theory of forces, Maupertuis thought that this law of the inverse squares of the distances
had been selected by the Author of Nature as the one He willed should exist in Nature.

125. Now, in the first place I was never satisfied, nor really shall I ever be satisfied, First reply to this ;
with the use of final causes in the investigation of Nature ; these I think can only be employed perfections™^ 'not
for a kind of study & contemplation, in such cases as those in which the laws of Nature known ; and even
have already been ascertained from other methods. For we cannot possibly be acquainted ^sdlcted^fo^'fhe
with all perfections ; for in no wise do we observe the inmost nature of things, but all we sake of greater per-
know are certain external properties. Nor is it at all possible for us to see & know all fl

the intentions which the Author of Nature could and did set before Himself when He founded

io8 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

videre, & nosse omnino non possumus. Quin immo cum juxta ipsos Leibnitianos inprimis,
aliosque omnes defensores acerrimos principii rationis sufficients, & Mundi perfectissimi,
qui inde consequitur, multa quidem in ipso Mundo sint mala, sed Mundus ipse idcirco
sit optimus, quod ratio boni ad malum in hoc, qui electus est, omnium est maxima ; fieri
utique poterit, ut in ea ipsius Mundi parte, quam hie, & nunc contemplamur, id, quod
electum fuit, debuerit esse non illud bonum, in cujus gratiam tolerantur alia mala, sed
illud malum, quod in aliorum bonorum gratiam toleratur. Quamobrem si ratio reciproca
duplicata distantiarum esset omnium perfectissima pro viribus mutuis particularum, non
inde utique sequeretur, earn pro Natura fuisse electam, & constitutam.

Eandem legem nee I26. At nee revera perfectissima est, quin immo meo quidem judicio est omnino

pcrfcctam esse, nee • r 0 • v 1 • i • • ...

in corporibus, non imperfecta, & tarn ipsa, quam aliae plunmse leges, quas requirunt attractionem immmutis
utique accurate distantiis crcscentcm in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum, ad absurda deducunt
' plurima, vel saltern ad inextricabiles difficultates, quod ego quidem turn alibi etiam, turn
inprimis demonstravi in dissertatione De Lege Firium in Natura existentium a num. 59. (g)
Accedit autem illud, quod ilia, qua; videtur ipsi esse perfectio maxima, quod nimirum
eandem sequantur legem globi integri, quam particulae minimae, nulli fere usui est in
Natura ; si res accurate ad exactitudinem absolutam exigatur ; cum nulli in Natura sint
accurate perfecti globi paribus a centre distantiis homogenei, nam praeter non exiguam
inaequalitatem interioris textus, & irregularitatem, quam ego quidem in Tellure nostra
demonstravi in Opere, quod de Litteraria Expeditione per Pontificiam ditionem inscripsi,
in reliquis autem planetis, & cometis suspicari possumus ex ipsa saltern analogia, prater
scabritiem superficiei, quaj utique est aliqua, satis patet, ipsa rotatione circa proprium
axem induci in omnibus compressionem aliquam, quae ut ut exigua, exactam globositatem
impedit, adeoque illam assumptam perfectionem maximam corrumpit. Accedit autem
& illud, quod Newtoniana determinatio rationis reciprocal duplicatae distantiarum locum
habet tantummodo in globis materia continua constantibus sine ullis vacuolis, qui globi
in Natura non existunt, & multo minus a me admitti possunt, qui non vacuum tantummodo
disseminatum in materia, ut Philosophi jam sane passim, sed materiam in immenso vacuo
innatantem, & punctula a se invicem remota, ex quibus, qui apparentes globi fiant, illam
habere proprietatem non possunt rationis reciprocal duplicatae distantiarum, adeoque nee
illius perfectionis creditas maxime perfectam, absolutamque applicationem.

o ex prae- \<:$\ \2j. Demum & illud nonnullis difficultatem parit summam in hac Theoria

juuiv-.w pro impul- £~ * ' . . . . . . f i. • i i ..

sione, & ex testi- Virium, quod censeant, phaenomena omnia per impulsionem explicari debere, & immedi-
monio sensuum : atum contactum, quern ipsum credant evidenti sensuum testimonio evinci ; hinc huiusmodi

responsio ad hanc . • r n « „ XT i •

posteriorem. nostras vires immechamcas appellant, & eas, ut & Newtomanorum generalem gravitatem,

vel idcirco rejiciunt, quod mechanicae non sint, & mechanismum, quem Newtoniana
labefactare coeperat, penitus evertant. Addunt autem etiam per jocum ex serio argumento
petito a sensibus, baculo utendum esse ad persuadendum neganti contactum. Quod ad
sensuum testimonium pertinet, exponam uberius infra, ubi de extensione agam, quae eo
in genere habeamus praejudicia, & unde : cum nimirum ipsis sensibus tribuamus id,
quod nostrae ratiocinationis, atque illationis vitio est tribuendum. Satis erit hie monere
illud, ubi corpus ad nostra organa satis accedat, vim repulsivam, saltern illam ultimam,
debere in organorum ipsorum fibris excitare motus illos ipsos, qui excitantur in
communi sententia ab impenetrabilitate, & contactu, adeoque eundem tremorem ad
cerebrum propagari, & eandem excitari debere in anima perceptionem, quae in
communi sententia excitaretur ; quam ob rem ab iis sensationibus, quae in hac ipsa
Theoria Virium haberentur, nullum utique argumentum desumi potest contra ipsam,
quod ullam vim habeant utcunque tenuem.

Felicius explicari 128. Quod pertinet ad explicationem phaenomenorum per impulsionem immediatam,

sione*- "eam^nus- rnonui sane superius, quanto felicius, ea prorsus omissa, Newtonus explicarit Astronomiam,

quam positive pro- & Opticam ; & patebit inferius, quanto felicius phaenomena quaeque praecipua sine ulla

immediata impulsione explicentur. Cum iis exemplis, turn aliis, commendatur abunde

ea ratio explicandi phsenomena, quae adhibet vires agentes in aliqua distantia. Ostendant

(g) Qute hue pertinent, (J continentur novem numeris ejus Dissertations incipiendo a 59, habentur in fine Supplem.
§4-

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 109

the Universe. Nay indeed, since in the doctrine of the followers of Leibniz more especially,
and of all the rest of the keenest defenders of the principle of sufficient reason, and a most
perfect Universe which is a direct consequence of that idea, there may be many evils in the
Universe, and yet the Universe may be the best possible, just because the ratio of
good to evil, in this that has been chosen, is the greatest possible. It might certainly happen
that in this part of the Universe, which here & now we are considering, that which was
chosen would necessarily be not that goodness in virtue of which other things that are
evil are tolerated, but that evil which is tolerated because of the other things that are good.
Hence, even if the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances were the most perfect of all
for the mutual forces between particles, it certainly would not follow from that fact that
it was chosen and established for Nature.

126. But this law as a matter of fact is not the most perfect of all; nay rather, in This law is neither
my opinion, it is altogether imperfect. Both it, & several other laws, that require £0^ec^Tori0Dodt-
attraction at very small distances increasing in the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances ies that are not
lead to very many absurdities ; or at least, to insuperable difficulties, as I showed in the exactly spherical,
dissertation De Lege Virium in Natura existentium in particular, as well as in other places. (g)

In addition there is the point that the thing, which to him seems to be the greatest
perfection, namely, the fact that complete spheres obey the same law as the smallest
particles composing them, is of no use at all in Nature ; for there are in Nature no exactly
perfect spheres having equal densities at equal distances from the centre. Besides the
not insignificant inequality & irregularity of internal composition, of which I proved the
existence in the Earth, in a work which I wrote under the title of De Litteraria Ex-peditione
per Pontificiam ditionem, we can assume also in the remaining planets & the comets (at
least by analogy), in addition to roughness of surface (of which it is sufficiently evident that
at any rate there is some), that there is some compression induced in all of them by the
rotation about their axes. This compression, although it is indeed but slight, prevents
true sphericity, & therefore nullifies that idea of the greatest perfection. There is too
the further point that the Newtonian determination of the inverse ratio of the squares
of the distances holds good only in spheres made up of continuous matter that is free from
small empty spaces ; & such spheres do not exist in Nature. Much less can I admit
such spheres ; for I do not so much as admit a vacuum disseminated throughout matter,
as philosophers of all lands do at the present time, but I consider that matter as it were
swims in an immense vacuum, & consists of little points separated from one another.
These apparent spheres, being composed of these points, cannot have the property of the
inverse ratio of the squares of the distances ; & thus also they cannot bear the true &
absolute application of that perfection that is credited so highly.

127. Finally, some persons raise the greatest objections to this Theory of mine, because Objection founded
they consider that all the phenomena must be explained by impulse and immediate contact ; "mpui^and'on the
this they believe to be proved by the clear testimony of the senses. So they call forces testimony of the
like those I propose non-mechanical, and reject them, just as they also reject the universal th?s latter. rep'y t0
gravitation of Newton, for the alleged reason that they are not mechanical, and overthrow

altogether the idea of mechanism which the Newtonian theory had already begun to
undermine. Moreover, they also add, by way of a joke in the midst of a serious argument
derived from the senses, that a stick would be useful for persuading anyone who denies
contact. Now as far as the evidence of the senses is concerned, I will set forth below,
when I discuss extension, the prejudices that we may form in. such cases, and the origin
of these prejudices. Thus, for instance, we may attribute to the senses what really ought
to be attributed to the imperfection of our reasoning and inference. It will be enough
just for the present to mention that, when a body approaches close enough to our organs,
my repulsive force (at any rate it is that finally), is bound to excite in the nerves of those
organs the motions which, according to the usual idea, are excited by impenetrability and
contact ; & that thus the same vibrations are sent to the brain, and these are bound to
excite the same perception in the mind as would be excited in accordance with the usual
idea. Hence, from these sensations, which are also obtained in my Theory of Forces, no
argument can be adduced against the theory, which will have even the slightest validity.

128. As regards the explanation of phenomena by means of immediate contact I, hsaver^thineg is^°^
indeed, mentioned above how much more happily Newton had explained Astronomy and without the idea of
Optics by omitting it altogether ; and it will be evident, in what follows, how much more |^^lse^ nowhere
happily every one of the important phenomena is explained without any idea of immediate rigorously proved
contact. - Both by these instances, and by many others, this method of explaining phenomena, to exist-

by employing forces acting at a distance, is strongly recommended. Let objectors bring

(g) That which refers to this point, & which is contained in nine articles of the dissertation commencing with Art. 59,
is to bf found at the end of this work as Supplement IV,

no PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

isti vel unicum exemplum, in quo positive probare possint, per immediatam impulsionem
communicari motum in Natura. Id sane ii praestabunt nunquam ; cum oculorum testi-
monium ad excludendas distantias illas minimas, ad quas primum crus repulsivum pertinet,
& contorsiones curvae circa axem, quae oculos necessario fugiunt, adhibere non possint ; cum
e contrario ego positive argumento superius excluserim immediatum contactum omnem,
& positive probaverim, ipsum, quern ii ubique volunt, haberi nusquam.

Vires hujus Theo- I2g j)e nominibus quidem non esset, cur solicitudinem haberem ullam ; sed ut &

rise pertineread ve- ...,•*,.., . ~t . . , ' . . ,. ...

rum, nee occuitum in nsdem aliquid prasjudicio cmdam, quod ex communi loquendi usu provenit, mud
mechanismum. notandum duco, Mechanicam non utique ad solam impulsionem immediatam fuisse
restrictam unquam ab iis, qui de ipsa tractarunt, sed ad liberos inprimis adhibitam contem-
plandos motus, qui independenter ab omni impulsione habeantur. Quae Archimedes de
aequilibrio tradidit, quse Galilaeus de li-[59]-bero gravium descensu, ac de projectis, quae
de centralibus in circulo viribus, & oscillationis centre Hugenius, quae Newtonus generaliter
de motibus in trajectoriis quibuscunque, utique ad Mechanicam pertinent, & Wolfiana
& Euleriana, & aliorum Scriptorum Mechanica passim utique ejusmodi vires, & motus inde
ortos contemplatur, qui fiant impulsione vel exclusa penitus, vel saltern mente seclusa.
Ubicunque vires agant, quae motum materiae gignant, vel immutent, & leges expandantur,
secundum quas velocitas oriatur, mutetur motus, ac motus ipse determinetur ; id omne
inprimis ad Mechanicam pertinet in admodum propria significatione acceptam. Quam-
obrem ii maxime ea ipsa propria vocum significatione abutuntur, qui impulsionem unicam
ad Mechanismum pertinere arbitrantur, ad quern haec virium genera pertinent multo magis,
qu33 idcirco appellari jure possunt vires Mechanic*?, & quidquid per illas fit, jure affirmari
potest fieri per Mechanismum, nee vero incognitum, & occuitum, sed uti supra demonstra-
vimus, admodum patentem, a manifestum.

Discrimen inter j -m Eodem etiam pacto in omnino propria significatione usurpare licebit vocem con-

contactum mathe- J . . .. * T i i •

maticum, & physi- tactus ; licet intervallum semper remaneat aliquod ; quanquam ego ad aequivocationes evi-
cum : hunc did tandas soleo distinguere inter contactum Mathematicum, in quo distantia sit prorsus nulla,

proprie contactum. ni • • j- • a. • o • 1 •

& contactum Physicum, in quo distantia sensus effugit omnes, & vis repulsiva satis magna
ulteriorem accessum per nostras vires inducendum impedit. Voces ab hominibus institutae
sunt ad significandas res corporeas, & corporum proprietates, prout nostris sensibus subsunt,
iis, quae continentur infra ipsos, nihil omnino curatis. Sic planum, sic laeve proprie dicitur
id, in quo nihil, quod sensu percipi possit, sinuetur, nihil promineat ; quanquam in communi
etiam sententia nihil sit in Natura mathematice planum, vel laeve. Eodem pacto & nomen
contactus ab hominibus institutum est, ad exprimendum physicum ilium contactum tantum-
modo, sine ulla cura contactus mathematics, de quo nostri sensus sententiam ferre non
possunt. Atque hoc quidem pacto si adhibeantur voces in propria significatione ilia, quae
ipsarum institutioni respondeat ; ne a vocibus quidem ipsis huic Theoriae virium invidiam
creare poterunt ii, quibus ipsa non placet.

extensionis sit orta.

Transitus ab ob- j^j. Atque haec de iis, quae contra ipsam virium legem a me propositam vel objecta

Theoriam virium sunt hactenus, vel objici possent, sint satis, ne res in infinitum excrescat. Nunc ad ilia
ad objections con- transibimus, quae contra constitutionem elementorum materiae inde deductam se menti

tra puncta. .•*.... i . j.

oiferunt, in quibus itidem, quae maxime notatu digna sunt, persequar.

Objectio ab idea 132. Inprimis quod pertinet ad hanc constitutionem elementorum materise, sunt

puncti inextensi, multi, qui nullo pacto in animum sibi possint inducere, ut admittant puncta prorsus

qua caremus : re- ,r i n T 11 • j A -J

sponsio : unde idea mdi-[6o]-visibiha, & mextensa, quod nullam se dicant habere posse eorum ideam. At id
a- hominum genus praejudiciis quibusdam tribuit multo plus aequo. Ideas omnes, saltern
eas, quae ad materiam pertinent, per sensus hausimus. Porro sensus nostri nunquam
potuerunt percipere singula elementa, quae nimirum vires exerunt nimis tenues ad movendas
fibras, & propagandum motum ad cerebrum : massis indiguerunt, sive elementorum
aggregatis, quae ipsas impellerent collata vi. Haec omnia aggregata constabant partibus,
quarum partium extremae sumptae hinc, & inde, debebant a se invicem distare per aliquod
intervallum, nee ita exiguum. Hinc factum est, ut nullam unquam per sensus acquirere
potuerimus ideam pertinentem ad materiam, quae simul & extensionem, & partes, ac
divisibilitatem non involverit. Atque idcirco quotiescunque punctum nobis animo sistimus,
nisi reflexione utamur, habemus ideam globuli cujusdam perquam exigui, sed tamen globuli
rotundi, habentis binas superficies oppositas distinctis.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY in

forward but a single instance in which they can positively prove that motion in Nature
is communicated by immediate impulse. Of a truth they will never produce one ; for
they cannot use the testimony of the eyes to exclude those very small distances to which
the first repulsive branch of my curve refers & the windings about the axis ; for these
necessarily evade ocular observation. Whilst I, on the other hand, by the rigorous argument
given above, have excluded all idea of immediate contact ; & I have positively proved
that the thing, which they wish to exist everywhere, as a matter of fact exists nowhere.

129. There is no reason why I should trouble myself about nomenclature ; but, as The forces in this
in that too there is something that, from the customary manner of speaking, gives rise to ^j^/^ot to an
a kind of prejudice, I think it should be observed that Mechanics was certainly never occult mechanism,
restricted to immediate impulse alone by those who have dealt with it ; but that in the

first place it was employed for the consideration of free motions, such as exist quite
independently of any impulse. The work of Archimedes on equilibrium, that of Galileo
on the free descent of heavy bodies & on projectiles, that of Huygens on central forces
in a circular orbit & on the centre of oscillation, what Newton proved in general for
motion on all sorts of trajectories ; all these certainly belong to the science of Mechanics.
The Mechanics of Wolf, Euler & other writers in different lands certainly treats of such
forces as these & the motions that arise from them, & these matters have been accomplished
with the idea of impulse excluded altogether, or at least put out of mind. Whenever
forces act, & there is an investigation of the laws in accordance with which velocity is
produced, motion is changed, or the motion itself is determined ; the whole of this belongs
especially to Mechanics in a truly proper signification of the term. Hence, they greatly
abuse the proper signification of terms, who think that impulse alone belongs to the science
of Mechanics ; to which these kinds of forces belong to a far greater extent. Therefore
these forces may justly be called Mechanical ; & whatever comes about through their
action can be justly asserted to have come about through a mechanism ; & one too that
is not unknown or mysterious, but, as we proved above, perfectly plain & evident.

130. Also in the same way we may employ the term contact in an altogether special Distinction be-
sense ; the interval may always remain something definite. Although, in order to avoid ticainandmph^eskai
ambiguity, I usually distinguish between mathematical contact, in which the distance is contact ; the latter
absolutely nothing, & -physical contact, in which the distance is too small to affect our Caned™orftact>.per y
senses, and the repulsive force is great enough to prevent closer approach being induced

by the forces we are considering. Words are formed by men to signify corporeal things
& the properties of such, as far as they come within the scope of the senses ; & those
that fall beneath this scope are absolutely not heeded at all. Thus, we properly call a
thing plane or smooth, which has no bend or projection in it that can be perceived by the
senses ; although, in the general opinion, there is nothing in Nature that is mathematically
plane or smooth. In the same way also, the term contact was invented by men to express
•physical contact only, without any thought of mathematical contact, of which our senses
can form no idea. In this way, indeed, if words are used in their correct sense, namely,
that which corresponds to their original formation, those who do not care for my Theory
of forces cannot from those words derive any objection against it.

131. I have now said sufficient about those objections that either up till now have Passing on from
been raised, or might be raised, against the law of forces that I have proposed ; otherwise ^y^Theorf ""of
the matter would grow beyond all bounds. Now we will pass on to objections against forces to objections
the constitution of the elements of matter derived from it, which present themselves to the agamst P°mts-
mind ; & in these also I will investigate those that more especially seem worthy of remark.

132. First of all, as regards the constitution of the elements of matter, there are indeed Potion to^the
many persons who cannot in any way bring themselves into that frame of mind to admit tended points,
the existence of points that are perfectly indivisible and non-extended ; for they say that which we postu-

*• < ' • T* i r 1_ 13. tc , reply , tiic

they cannot form any idea of such points. But that type of men pays more heed than origin of the idea

is right to certain prejudices. We derive all our ideas, at any rate those that relate to of extension.

matter, from the evidences of our senses. Further, our senses never could perceive single

elements, which indeed give forth forces that are too slight to affect the nerves & thus

propagate motion to the brain. The senses would need masses, or aggregates of the elements,

which would affect them as a result of their combined force. Now all these aggregates are

made up of parts ; & of these parts the two extremes on the one side and on the^ other

must be separated from one another by a certain interval, & that not an insignificant

one. Hence it comes about that we could never obtain through the senses any idea relating

to matter, which did not involve at the same time extension, parts & divisibility. So,

as often as we thought of a point, unless we used our reflective powers, we should get the

idea of a sort of ball, exceedingly small indeed, but still a round ball, having two distinct

and opposite faces.

"2 PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

idea m puncti 133. Quamobrem ad concipiendum punctum indivisibile, & inextensum ; non debemus

refl^xionemT'quo- consulere ideas> quas immediate per sensus hausimus ; sed earn nobis debemus efformare

modo ejus idea per reflexionem. Reflexione adhibita non ita difficulter efformabimus nobis ideam ejusmodi.

negativa acqmra- Nam inprimi s ubi & extensionem, & partium compositionem conceperimus ; si utranque

negemus ; jam inextensi, & indivisibilis ideam quandam nobis comparabimus per negati-

onem illam ipsam eorum, quorum habemus ideam ; uti foraminis ideam habemus utique

negando existentiam illius materias, quas deest in loco foraminis.

Quomodo ejus idea 134. Verum & positivam quandam indivisibilis, & inextensi puncti ideam poterimus

posfit^per itmlte" comParare n°bis ope Geometrias, & ope illius ipsius ideas extensi continui, quam per sensus
& limitum inter- hausimus, & quam inferius ostendemus, fallacem esse, ac fontem ipsum fallacies ejusmodi
aperiemus, quas tamen ipsa ad indivisibilium, & inextensorum ideam nos ducet admodum
claram. Concipiamus planum quoddam prorsus continuum, ut mensam, longum ex. gr.
pedes duos ; atque id ipsum planum concipiamus secari transversum secundum longitudinem
ita, ut tamen iterum post sectionem conjungantur partes, & se contingant. Sectio ilia
erit utique limes inter partem dexteram & sinistram, longus quidem pedes duos, quanta
erat plani longitude, at latitudinis omnino expers : nam ab altera parte immediate motu
continue transitur ad alteram, quse, si ilia sectio crassitudinem haberet aliquam, non esset
priori contigua. Ilia sectio est limes secundum crassitudinem inextensus, & indivisibilis,
cui si occurrat altera sectio transversa eodem pacto indivisibilis, & inextensa ; oportebit
utique, intersectio utriusque in superficie plani concepti nullam omnino habeat extensionem
in partem quamcumque. Id erit punctum peni-[6i]-tus indivisibile, & inextensum, quod
quidem punctum, translate piano, movebitur, & motu suo lineam describet, longam quidem,
sed latitudinis expertem.

Natura inextensi, j^c. Quo autem melius ipsius indivisibilis natura concipi possit ; quasrat a nobis

quod non potest . /" r , . £ , . ^. . . ' ".

esse inextenso con- quispiam, ut aliam faciamus ejus planae massas sectionem, quas priori ita sit proxima, ut
tiguum in Uneis. nihil prorsus inter utramque intersit. Respondebimus sane, id fieri non posse : vel enim
inter novam sectionem, & veteram intercedet aliquid ejus materias, ex qua planum con-
tinuum constare concipimus, vel nova sectio congruet penitus cum praecedente. En
quomodo ideam acquiremus etiam ejus naturas indivisibilis illius, & inextensi, ut aliud
indivisibile, & inextensum ipsi proximum sine medio intervallo non admittat, sed vel cum
eo congruat, vel aliquod intervallum relinquat inter se, & ipsum. Atque hinc patebit
etiam illud, non posse promoveri planum ipsum ita, ut ilia sectio promoveatur tantummodo
per spatium latitudinis sibi asqualis. Utcunque exiguus fuerit motus, jam ille novus
sectionis locus distabit a praecedente per aliquod intervallum, cum sectio sectioni contigua
esse non possit.

Eademin punctis : 136. Hasc si ad concursum sectionum transferamus, habebimus utique non solum ideam

idea puncti eeo- ..,...,.,.„. . , . ,. ... v j -i •

metricf transiata puncti indivisibilis, & inextensi, sed ejusmodi naturae puncti ipsius, ut aliud punctum sibi
ad physicum, & contiguum habere non possit, sed vel congruant, vel aliquo a se invicem intervallo distent.
Et hoc pacto sibi & Geometrae ideam sui puncti indivisibilis, & inextensi, facile efformare
possunt, quam quidem etiam efformant sibi ita, ut prima Euclidis definitio jam inde incipiat :
•punctum est, cujus nulla •pars est. Post hujusmodi ideam acquisitam illud unum intererit
inter geometricum punctum, & punctum physicum materiae, quod hoc secundum habebit
proprietates reales vis inertias, & virium illarum activarum, quas cogent duo puncta ad se
invicem accedere, vel a se invicem recedere, unde net, ut ubi satis accesserint ad organa
nostrorum sensuum, possint in iis excitare motus, qui propagati ad cerebrum, perceptiones
ibi eliciant in anima, quo pacto sensibilia erunt, adeoque materialia, & realia, non pure
imaginaria.

Punctorum exist- j-- gn jgjtur per reffexionem acquisitam ideam punctorum realium, materialium,

entiam aliunde . .. ,J.( °. . . , . . r r.

demonstrari : per indivisibilium, inextensorum, quam inter ideas ab infantia acquisitas per sensus mcassum
ideam acquisitam quaerimus. Idea ejusmodi non evincit eorum existentiam. Ipsam quam nobis exhibent

ea tantum concipi. ^ . . J . , , . . ..*-."«...

positiva argumenta superms facta, quod mmirum, ne admittatur in colhsione corporum
saltus, quern & inductio, & impossibilitas binarum velocitatum diversarum habendarum
omnino ipso momento, quo saltus fieret, excludunt, oportet admittere in materia vires,
quas repulsivae sint in minimis distantiis, & iis in infinitum imminutis augeantur in infinitum ;

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 113

133. Hence for the purpose of forming an idea of a point that is indivisible & non- The idea of a point
extended, we cannot consider the ideas that we derive directly from the senses ; but we ^"refleTti obtaihrxed
must form our own idea of it by reflection. If we reflect upon it, we shall form an idea a negative>nidea°of
of this sort for ourselves without much difficulty. For, in the first place, when we have con- rt may ^ ac(iuired-
ceived the idea of extension and composition by parts, if we deny the existence of both, then

we shall get a sort of idea of non-extension & indivisibility by that very negation of the
existence of those things of which we already have formed an idea. For instance, we have
the idea of a hole by denying the existence of matter, namely, that which is absent from
the position in which the hole lies.

134. But we can also get an idea of a point that is indivisible & non-extended, by HOW a positive idea
the aid of geometry, and by the help of that idea of an extended continuum that we derive ^^ ^of^bourf
from the senses ; this we will show below to be a fallacy, & also we will open up the very daries, and inter-
source of this kind of fallacy, which nevertheless will lead us to a perfectly clear idea of ^g°ns of boun"
indivisible & non-extended points. Imagine some thing that is perfectly plane and
continuous, like a table-top, two feet in length ; & suppose that this plane is cut across

along its length ; & let the parts after section be once more joined together, so that they
touch one another. The section will be the boundary between the left part and the right
part ; it will be two feet in length (that being the length of the plane before section), &
altogether devoid of breadth. For we can pass straightaway by a continuous motion
from one part to the other part, which would not be contiguous to the first part if the section
had any thickness. The section is a boundary which, as regards breadth, is non-extended
& indivisible ; if another transverse section which in the same way is also indivisible &
non-extended fell across the first, then it must come about that the intersection of the
two in the surface of the assumed plane has no extension at all in any direction. It will
be a point that is altogether indivisible and non-extended ; & this point, if the plane
be moved, will also move and by its motion will describe a line, which has length indeed
but is devoid of breadth.

135. The nature of an indivisible itself can be better conceived in the following way. The nature of a
Suppose someone should ask us to make another section of the plane mass, which shall lie °h°in~gextwIhich
so near to the former section that there is absolutely no distance between them. We cannot he next to
should indeed reply that it could not be done. For either between the new section & ^ S

the old there would intervene some part of the matter of which the continuous plane was concerned,
composed ; or the new section would completely coincide with the first. Now see how
we acquire an idea also of the nature of that indivisible and non-extended thing, which
is such that it does not allow another indivisible and non-extended thing to lie next to it
without some intervening interval ; but either coincides with it or leaves some definite
interval between itself & the other. Hence also it will be clear that it is not possible
so to move the plane, that the section will be moved only through a space equal to its own
breadth. However slight the motion is supposed to be, the new position of the section
would be at a distance from the former position by some definite interval ; for a section
cannot be contiguous to another section.

136. If now we transfer these arguments to the intersection of sections, we shall truly Th.e same thing for
have not only the idea of an indivisible & non-extended point, but also an idea of the ^geometrical point
nature of a point of this sort ; which is such that it cannot have another point contiguous transferred to a
to it, but the two either coincide or else they are separated from one another by some interval. riafpoLt^

In this way also geometricians can easily form an idea of their own kind of indivisible &
non-extended points ; & indeed they do so form their idea of them, for the first defi-
nition of Euclid begins : — A -point is that which has no parts. After an idea of this sort has
been acquired, there is but one difference between a geometrical point & a physical point
of matter ; this lies in the fact that the latter possesses the real properties of a force of
inertia and of the active forces that urge the two points to approach towards, or recede
from, one another ; whereby it comes about that when they have approached sufficiently
near to the organs of our senses, they can excite motions in them which, when propagated
to the brain, induce sensations in the mind, and in this way become sensible, & thus
material and real, & not imaginary.

137. See then how by reflection the idea of real, material, indivisible, non-extended The existence of
points can be acquired ; whilst we seek for it in vain amongst those ideas that we have o^herwise^demon-
acquired since infancy by means of the senses. But an idea of this sort about things does strated ; they can
not prove that these things exist. That is just what the rigorous arguments given above through ^cquir-
point out to us ; that is to say, because, in order that in the collision of solids a sudden ing an idea of them,
change should not be admitted (which change both induction & the impossibility of

there being two different velocities at the same instant in which the change should take
place), it had to be admitted that in matter there were forces which are repulsive ^at very
small distances, & that these increased indefinitely as the distances were diminished.

I

ii4 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

unde fit, ut duse particulae materiae sibi [62] invicem contiguae esse non possint : nam illico
vi ilia repulsiva resilient a se invicem, ac particula iis constans statim disrumpetur, adeoque
prima materiae elementa non constant contiguis partibus, sed indivisibilia sunt prorsus,
atque simplicia, & vero etiam ob inductionem separabilitatis, ac distinctionis eorum, quae
occupant spatii divisibilis partes diversas, etiam penitus inextensa. Ilia idea acquisita per
reflexionem illud praestat tantummodo, ut distincte concipiamus id, quod ejusmodi rationes
ostendunt existere in Natura, & quod sine reflexione, & ope illius supellectilis tantummodo,
quam per sensus nobis comparavimus ab ipsa infantia, concipere omnino non liceret.

Ceterum simplicium, & inextensorum notionem non ego primus in Physicam
aiiis quoque ad- induco. Eorum ideam habuerunt veteres post Zenonem, & Leibnitiani monades suas &
"rastare "hanc simP^ces utique volunt, & inextensas ; ego cum ipsorum punctorum contiguitatem auferam,
eorum theoriam. & distantias velim inter duo quaelibet materiae puncta, maximum evito scopulum, in quern
utrique incurrunt, dum ex ejusmodi indivisibilibus, & inextensis continuum extensum
componunt. Atque ibi quidem in eo videntur mini peccare utrique, quod cum simplicitate,
& inextensione, quam iis elementis tribuunt, commiscent ideam illam imperfectam, quam
sibi compararunt per sensus, globuli cujusdam rotundi, qui binas habeat superficies a se
distinctas, utcumque interrogati, an id ipsum faciant, omnino sint negaturi. Neque enim
aliter possent ejusmodi simplicibus inextensis implere spatium, nisi concipiendo unum
elementum in medio duorum ab altero contactum ad dexteram, ab altero ad laevam, quin
ea extrema se contingant; in quo, praeter contiguitatem indivisibilium, & inextensorum
impossibilem, uti supra demonstravimus, quam tamen coguntur admittere, si rem altius
perpenderint ; videbunt sane, se ibi illam ipsam globuli inter duos globules inter jacentis
ideam admiscere.

impugnatur con- 139. Nee ad indivisibilitatem, & inextensionem elementorum conjungendas cum

formats ^b^inex- continua extensione massarum ab iis compositarum prosunt ea, quae nonnulli ex Leibniti-

tensis petita ab anorum familia proferunt, de quibus egi in una adnotatiuncula adjecta num. 13. dissertationis
impenetrabiiitate. j)g Mater its Divisibilitate, £? Principiis Corporum, ex qua, quae eo pertinent, hue libet
transferre. Sic autem habet : Qui dicunt, monades non compenetrari, quia natura sua
impenetrabiles sunt, ii difficultatem nequaquam amovenf ; nam si e? natura sua impenetrable s
sunt, y continuum debent componere, adeoque contigua esse ; compenetrabuntur simul, W non
compenetrabuntur, quod ad absurdum deducit, W ejusmodi entium impossibilitatem evincit.
Ex omnimodfs inextensionis, & contiguitatis notione evincitur, compenetrari debere argumento
contra Zenonistas institute per tot stecula, £if cui nunquam satis responsum est. Ex natura,
qua in [63] iis supponitur, ipsa compenetratio excluditur, adeoque habetur contradictio, &
absurdum.

inductionem a 140'. Sunt alii, quibus videri poterit, contra haec ipsa puncta indivisibilia, & inextensa

sensibihbus com- ,1 ., T. . , ^ . . . . r. . r. K .

positis, & extensis adniberi posse mductionis prmcipmm, a quo contmuitatis legem, & alias propnetates
haud vaiere contra derivavimus supra, quae nos ad haec indivisibilia, & inextensa puncta deduxerunt. Videmus

puncta simplicia, & t* *. . . ... ... ,. . .. ...

inextensa. enim in matena omni, quae se uspiam nostns objiciat sensibus, extensionem, divisibihtatem,

partes ; quamobrem hanc ipsam proprietatem debemus transferre ad elementa etiam per
inductionis principium. Ita ii : at hanc difficultatem jam superius praeoccupavimus, ubi
egimus de inductionis principio. Pendet ea proprietas a ratione sensibilis, & aggregati, cum
nimirum sub sensus nostros ne composita quidem, quorum moles nimis exigua sit, cadere
possint. Hinc divisibilitatis, & extensionis proprietas ejusmodi est ; ut ejus defectus, si
habeatur alicubi is casus, ex ipsa earum natura, & sensuum nostrorum constitutione non
possit cadere sub sensus ipsos, atque idcirco ad ejusmodi proprietates argumentum desumptum
ab inductione nequaquam pertingit, ut nee ad sensibilitatem extenditur.

Per ipsam etiam 141. Sed etiam si extenderetur, esset adhuc nostrae Theoriae causa multo melior in eo,

tensT^Hn^uctioms q110^ circa, extensionem, & compositionem partium negativa sit. Nam eo ipso, quod

habitam ipsum ex- continuitate admissa, continuitas elementorum legitima ratiocinatione excludatur, excludi

omnino debet absolute ; ubi quidem illud accidit, quod a Metaphysicis, & Geometris

nonnullis animadversum est jam diu, licere aliquando demonstrare propositionem ex

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 115

From this it comes about that two particles of matter cannot be contiguous ; for thereupon
they would recoil from one another owing to that repulsive force, & a particle composed
of them would at once be broken up. Thus, the primary elements of matter cannot be
composed of contiguous parts, but must be perfectly indivisible & simple ; and also on
account of the induction from separability & the distinction between those that occupy
different divisible parts of space, they must be perfectly non-extended as well. The idea
acquired by reflection only yields the one result, namely, that through it we may form
a clear conception of that which reasoning of this kind proves to be existent in Nature ;
of which, without reflection, using only the equipment that we have got together for
ourselves by means of the senses from our infancy, we could not have formed any
conception.

138. Besides, I was not the first to introduce the notion of simple non-extended points Simple and
into physics. The ancients from the time of Zeno had an idea of them, & the followers are^admitt
of Leibniz indeed suppose that their monads are simple & non-extended. I, since I do others as well ; but
not admit the contiguity of the points themselves, but suppose that any two points of ^m is "the7 best."
matter are separated from one another, avoid a mighty rock, upon which both these others
come to grief, whilst they build up an extended continuum from indivisible & non-extended
things of this sort. Both seem to me to have erred in doing so, because they have mixed
up with the simplicity & non-extension that they attribute to the elements that imperfect
idea of a sort of round globule having two surfaces distinct from one another, an idea they
have acquired through the senses ; although, if they were asked if they had made this
supposition, they would deny that they had done so. For in no other way can they fill up
space with indivisible and non-extended things of this sort, unless by imagining that one
element between two others is touched by one of them on the right & by the other on
the left. If such is their idea, in addition to contiguity of indivisible & non-extended
things (which is impossible, as I proved above, but which they are forced to admit if they
consider the matter more carefully) ; in addition to this, I say, they will surely see that they
have introduced into their reasoning that very idea of the two little spheres lying between
two others.

I3Q. Those arguments that some of the Leibnitian circle put forward are of no use The deduction from

, i ~ r • • T • -i •!• o • r i i -i. • impenetrability of

for the purpose of connecting indivisibility & non-extension of the elements with continuous a conciliation of

extension of the masses formed from them. I discussed the arguments in question in extension ^j1 ^

a short note appended to Art. 13 of the dissertation De Materies Divisibilitate and extendeTthings.

Principiis Corporum ; & I may here quote from that dissertation those things that concern

us now. These are the words : — Those, who say that monads cannot be corn-penetrated, because

they are by nature impenetrable, by no means remove the difficulty. For, if they are both by

nature impenetrable, & also at the same time have to make up a continuum, i.e., have to be

contiguous, then at one & the same time they are compenetrated & they are not compenetrated ;

y this leads to an absurdity \3 proves the impossibility of entities of this sort. For, from the

idea of non-extension of any sort, & of contiguity, it is proved by an argument instituted

against the Zenonists many centuries ago that there is bound to be compenetration ; & -this

argument has never been satisfactorily answered. From the nature that is ascribed to them,

this compenetration is excluded. Thus there is a contradiction 13 an absurdity.

140. There are others, who will think that it is possible to employ, for the purpose induction derived
of opposing the idea of these indivisible & non-extended points, the principle of induction, ^T'senslSf3 <£m*-
by which we derived the Law of Continuity & other properties, which have led us to pound, and ex-
these indivisible & non-extended points. For we perceive (so they say) in all matter, avauedforrthefpur°
that falls under our notice in any way, extension, divisibility & parts. Hence we must pose of opposing
transfer this property to the elements also by the principle of induction. Such is their

argument. But we have already discussed this difficulty, when we dealt with the principle
of induction. The property in question depends on a reasoning concerned with a sensible
body, & one that is an aggregate ; for, in fact, not even a. composite body can come within
the scope of our senses, if its mass is over-small. Hence the property of divisibility &
extension is such that the absence of this property (if this case ever comes about), from
the very nature of divisibility & extension, & from the constitution of our senses, cannot
fall within the scope of those senses. Therefore an argument derived from induction will
not apply to properties of this kind in any way, inasmuch as the extension does not reach
the point necessary for sensibility.

141. But even if this point is reached, there would only be all the more reason for our Extension
Theory from the fact that it denies extension and composition by parts. For, from the very exclusion of
fact that, if continuity be admitted, continuity of the elements is excluded by legitimate exte^seio
argument, it follows that continuity ought to be absolutely excluded in all cases. For in duCtion.
that case we get an instance of the argument that has been observed by metaphysicists

and some geometers for a very long time, namely, that a proposition may sometimes be

n6 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

assumpta veritate contradictoriae propositionis ; cum enim ambae simul verae esse non
possint, si ab altera inferatur altera, hanc posteriorem veram esse necesse est. Sic nimirum,
quoniam a continuitate generaliter assumpta defectus continuitatis consequitur in materiae
elementis, & in extensione, defectum hunc haberi vel inde eruitur : nee oberit
quidquam principium inductionis physicae, quod utique non est demonstrativum, nee vim
habet, nisi ubi aliunde non demonstretur, casum ilium, quern inde colligere possumus,
improbabilem esse tantummodo, adhuc tamen haberi, uti aliquando sunt & falsa veris
probabiliora.

Cujusmodi con- 142. Atque hie quidem, ubi de continuitate seipsam excludente mentio injecta est,

TheoiSadrnittatur n°tandum & illud, continuitatis legem a me admitti, & probari pro quantitatibus, quae
quid sit spatium, magnitudinem mutent, quas nimirum ab una magnitudine ad aliam censeo abire non posse,
& tempus. njg- transeant per intermedias, quod elementorum materiae, quse magnitudinem nee mutant,

nee ullam habent variabilem, continuitatem non inducit, sed argumento superius facto
penitus summovet. Quin etiam ego quidem continuum nullum agnosco coexistens, uti &
supra monui ; nam nee spatium reale mihi est ullum continuum, sed [64] imaginarium
tantummodo, de quo, uti & de tempore, quae in hac mea Theoria sentiam, satis luculenter
exposui in Supplementis ad librum i. Stayanae Philosophise (*). Censeo nimirum quodvis
materiae punctum, habere binos reales existendi modos, alterum localem, alterum tem-
porarium, qui num appellari debeant res, an tantummodo modi rei, ejusmodi litem, quam
arbitror esse tantum de nomine, nihil omnino euro. Illos modos debere admitti, ibi ego
quidem positive demonstro : eos natura sua immobiles esse, censeo ita, ut idcirco ejusmodi
existendi modi per se inducant relationes prioris, & posterioris in tempore, ulterioris, vel
citerioris in loco, ac distantiae cujusdam deter minatae, & in spatio determinatae positionis
etiam, qui modi, vel eorum alter, necessario mutari debeant, si distantia, vel etiam in spatio
sola mutetur positio. Pro quovis autem modo pertinente ad quodvis punctum, penes
omnes infinites modos possibiles pertinentes ad quodvis aliud, mihi est unus, qui cum eo
inducat in tempore relationem coexistentiae ita, ut existentiam habere uterque non possit,
quin simul habeant, & coexistant ; in spatio vero, si existunt simul, inducant relationem
compenetrationis, reliquis omnibus inducentibus relationem distantiae temporarise, vel
localis, ut & positionis cujusdam localis determinatae. Quoniam autem puncta materiae
existentia habent semper aliquam a se invicem distantiam, & numero finita sunt ; finitus est
semper etiam localium modorum coexistentium numerus, nee ullum reale continuum
efformat. Spatium vero imaginarium est mihi possibilitas omnium modorum localium
confuse cognita, quos simul per cognitionem praecisivam concipimus, licet simul omnes
existere non possint, ubi cum nulli sint modi ita sibi proximi, vel remoti, ut alii viciniores,
vel remotiores haberi non possint, nulla distantia inter possibiles habetur, sive minima
omnium, sive maxima. Dum animum abstrahimus ab actuali existentia, & in possibilium
serie finitis in infinitum constante terminis mente secludimus tarn minimae, quam maximae
distantiae limitem, ideam nobis efformamus continuitatis, & infinitatis in spatio, in quo
idem spatii punctum appello possibilitatem omnium modorum localium, sive, quod idem
est, realium localium punctorum pertinentium ad omnia materiae puncta, quae si existerent,
compenetrationis relationem inducerent, ut eodem pacto idem nomino momentum tem-
poris temporarios modos omnes, qui relationem inducunt coexistentiae. Sed de utroque
plura in illis dissertatiunculis, in quibus & analogiam persequor spatii, ac temporis
multiplicem.

Ubi habeat con- [65] 143. Continuitatem igitur agnosco in motu tantummodo, quod est successivum
uibilitaffee1ctetNatUra ^u^' non coexistens, & in eo itidem solo, vel ex eo solo in corporeis saltern entibus legem
continuitatis admitto. Atque hinc patebit clarius illud etiam, quod superius innui,
Naturam ubique continuitatis legem vel accurate observare, vel affectare saltern. ^ Servat in
motibus, & distantiis, affectat in aliis casibus multis, quibus continuity, uti etiam supra
definivimus, nequaquam convenit, & in aliis quibusdam, in quibus haberi omnino non pptest
continuitas, quae primo aspectu sese nobis objicit res non aliquanto intimius inspectantibus,
ac perpendentibus : ex. gr. quando Sol oritur supra horizontem, si concipiamus Solis discum

(h) Binte dissertatiunculis, qua hue pertinent, inde excerptte habentur hie Supplementorum § I, 13 2, quarum mentio
facta est etiam superius num. 66, W 86.

con-

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 117

proved by assuming the truth of the contradictory proposition. For since both propositions
cannot be true at the same time, if from one of them the other can be inferred, then the latter
of necessity must be the true one. Thus, for instance, because it follows, from the
assumption of continuity in general, that there is an absence of continuity in the elements
of matter, & also in the case of extension, we come to the conclusion that there is this
absence. Nor will any principle of physical induction be prejudicial to the argument,
where the induction is not one that can be proved in every case ; neither will it have any
validity, except in the case where it cannot be proved in other ways that the conclusion
that we can come to from the argument is highly improbable but yet is to be held as
true ; for indeed sometimes things that are false are more plausible than the true facts.

142. Now, in this connection, whilst incidental mention has been made of the exclusion xhe sort of

of continuity, it should be observed that the Law of Continuity is admitted by me, & tinuum that is
proved for those quantities that change their magnitude, but which indeed I consider Th^r^fthe^ature
cannot pass from one magnitude to another without going through intermediate stages ; of sPace and time,
but that this does not lead to continuity in the case of the elements of matter, which neither
change their magnitude nor have anything variable about them ; on the contrary it proves
quite the opposite, as the argument given above shows. Moreover, I recognize no co-
existing continuum, as I have already mentioned ; for, in my opinion, space is not any
real continuum, but only an imaginary one ; & what I think about this, and about time
as well, as far as this Theory is concerned, has been expounded clearly enough in the
supplements to the first book of Stay's Philosophy. (A) For instance, I consider that any
point of matter has two modes of existence, the one local and the other temporal ; I do
not take the trouble to argue the point as to whether these ought to be called things, or
merely modes pertaining to a thing, as I consider that this is merely a question of terminology.
That it is necessary that these modes be admitted, I prove rigorously in the supplements
mentioned above. I consider also that they are by their very nature incapable of being
displaced ; so that, of themselves, such modes of existence lead to the relations of before
& after as regards time, far & near as regards space, & also of a given distance &
a given position in space. These modes, or one of them, must of necessity be changed,
if the distance, or even if only the position in space is altered. Moreover, for any one
mode belonging to any point, taken in conjunction with all the infinite number of possible
modes pertaining to any other point, there is in my opinion one which, taken in conjunction
with the first mode, leads as far as time is concerned to a relation of coexistence ; so that
both cannot have existence unless they have it simultaneously, i.e., they coexist. But,
as far as space is concerned, if they exist simultaneously, the conjunction leads to a relation
of compenetration. All the others lead to a relation of temporal or of local distance, as
also of a given local position. Now since existent points of matter always have some distance
between them, & are finite in number, the number of local modes of existence is also
always finite ; & from this finite number we cannot form any sort of real continuum.
But I have an ill-defined idea of an imaginary space as a possibility of all local modes, which
are precisely conceived as existing simultaneously, although they cannot all exist simul-
taneously. In this space, since there are not modes so near to one another that there
cannot be others nearer, or so far separated that there cannot be others more so, there
cannot therefore be a distance that is either the greatest or the least of all, amongst those
that are possible. So long as we keep the mind free from the idea of actual existence &, in
a series of possibles consisting of an indefinite number of finite terms, we mentally exclude
the limit both of least & greatest distance, we form for ourselves a conception of continuity
& infinity in space. In this, I define the same point of space to be the possibility of all
local modes, or what comes to the same thing, of real local points pertaining to all points
of matter, which, if they existed, would lead to a relation of compenetration ; just as I
define the same instant of time as all temporal modes, which lead to a relation of coexistence.
But there is a fuller treatment of both these subjects in the notes referred to ; & in them
I investigate further the manifold analogy between space & time.

143. Hence I acknowledge continuity in motion only, which is something successive where there is con-

i TJ . . .° . , ' , f . V °. . tmuity in Nature ;

and not co-existent ; & also in it alone, or because or it alone, in corporeal entities at any Where Nature does
rate, lies my reason for admitting the Law of Continuity. From this it will be all the no more than at-
more clear that, as I remarked above, Nature accurately observes the Law of Continuity, jteml
or at least tries to do so. Nature observes it in motions & in distance, & tries to in many
other cases, with which continuity, as we have defined it above, is in no wise in agree-
ment ; also in certain other cases, in which continuity cannot be completely obtained. This
continuity does not present itself to us at first sight, unless we consider the subjects somewhat
more deeply & study them closely. For instance, when the sun rises above the horizon,

(h) The two notes, which refer to this matter, have been quoted in this work as supplements IS- II : these have
been already referred to in Arts. 66 & 86 above.

n8 PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

ut continuum, & horizontem ut planum quoddam ; ascensus Solis fit per omnes magnitudines
ita, ut a primo ad postremum punctum & segmenta Solaris disci, & chordae segmentorum
crescant transeundo per omnes intermedias magnitudines. At Sol quidem in mea Theoria
non est aliquid continuum, sed est aggregatum punctorum a se invicem distantium, quorum
alia supra illud imaginarium planum ascendunt post alia, intervallo aliquo temporis inter-
posito semper. Hinc accurata ilia continuitas huic casui non convenit, & habetur tantummodo
in distantiis punctorum singulorum componentium earn massam ab illo imaginario piano.
Natura tamen etiam hie continuitatem quandam affectat, cum nimirum ilia punctula ita
sibi sint invicem proxima, & ita ubique dispersa, ac disposita, ut apparens quaedam ibi etiam
continuitas habeatur, ac in ipsa distributione, a qua densitas pendet, ingentes repentini
saltus non riant.

Exempla continu- 144. Innumera ejus rei exempla liceret proferre, in quibus eodem pacto res pergit.

it at is apparent gjc jn fluviorum alveis, in frondium flexibus, in ipsis salium, & crystallorum, ac aliorum

tantum : unde ea ..... . ,., . • •••*.«,

ortum ducat. corporum angulis, in ipsis cuspidibus unguium, quae acutissimae in quibusdam ammalibus
apparent nudo oculo ; si microscopio adhibito inspiciantur ; nusquam cuspis abrupta
prorsus, nusquam omnino cuspidatus apparet angulus, sed ubique flexus quidam, qui
curvaturam habeat aliquam, & ad continuitatem videatur accedere. In omnibus tamen iis
casibus vera continuitas in mea Theoria habetur nusquam ; cum omnia ejusmodi corpora
constent indivisibilibus, & a se distantibus punctis, quse continuam superficiem non efformant,
& in quibus, si quaevis tria puncta per rectas lineas conjuncta intelligantur ; triangulum
habebitur utique cum angulis cuspidatis. Sed a motuum, & virium continuitate accurata
etiam ejusmodi proximam continuitatem massarum oriri censeo, & a casuum possibilium
multitudine inter se collata, quod ipsum innuisse sit satis.

Motuum omnium 145- Atque hinc fiet manifestum, quid respondendum ad casus quosdam, qui eo

continuitas in -pertinent, & in quibus violari quis crederet F661 continuitatis legem. Quando piano aliquo

line is continuis r .*. fr . n • • n • •

nusquam inter- speculo lux excipitur, pars relrmgitur, pars renectitur : in renexione, & retractione, uti earn
ruptis, aut mutatis. olim creditum est fieri, & etiamnum a nonnullis creditur, per impulsionem nimirum, &
incursum immediatum, fieret violatio quaedam continui motus mutata linea recta in aliam ;
sed jam hoc Newtonus advertit, & ejusmodi saltum abstulit, explicando ea phenomena per
vires in aliqua distantia agentes, quibus fit, ut quaevis particula luminis motum incurvet
paullatim in accessu ad superficiem re flectentem, vel refringentem ; unde accessuum, &
recessuum lex, velocitas, directionum flexus, omnia juxta continuitatis legem mutantur.
Quin in mea Theoria non in aliqua vicinia tantum incipit flexus ille, sed quodvis materiae
punctum a Mundi initio unicam quandam continuam descripsit orbitam, pendentem a
continua ilia virium lege, quam exprimit figura I , quae ad distantias quascunque protenditur ;
quam quidem lineae continuitatem nee liberae turbant animarum vires, quas itidem non nisi
juxta continuitatis legem exerceri a nobis arbitror ; unde fit, ut quemadmodum omnem
accuratam quietem, ita omnem accurate rectilineum motum, omnem accurate circularem,
ellipticum, parabolicum excludam ; quod tamen aliis quoque sententiis omnibus commune
esse debet ; cum admodum facile sit demonstrare, ubique esse perturbationem quandam,
& mutationum causas, quae non permittant ejusmodi linearum nobis ita simplicium accuratas
orbitas in motibus.

Apparens saltus in 146. Et quidem ut in iis omnibus, & aliis ejusmodi Natura semper in mea Theoria

diffusione reflexi, accuratissimam continuitatem observat, ita & hie in reflexionibus, ac refractionibus luminis.

ac refracti luminis. . ,. , . ..'..,. , , , '. . ,

At est ahud ea in re, in quo continuitatis violatio quaedam haben videatur, quam, qui rem
altius perpendat, credet primo quidem, servari itidem accurate a Natura, turn ulterius
progressus, inveniet affectari tantummodo, non servari. Id autem est ipsa luminis diffusio,
atque densitas. Videtur prima fronte discindi radius in duos, qui hiatu quodam intermedio
a se invicem divellantur velut per saltum, alia parte reflexa, ali refracta, sine ullo intermedio
flexu cujuspiam. Alius itidem videtur admitti ibidem saltus quidam : si enim radius
integer excipiatur prismate ita, ut una pars reflectatur, alia transmittatur, & prodeat etiam
e secunda superficie, turn ipsum prisma sensim convertatur ; ubi ad certum devenitur in
conversione angulum, lux, quae datam habet refrangibilitatem, jam non egreditur, sed
reflectitur in totum ; ubi itidem videtur fieri transitus a prioribus angulis cum superficie
semper minoribus, sed jacentibus ultra ipsam, ad angulum reflexionis aequalem angulo

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 119

if we think of the Sun's disk as being continuous, & the horizon as a certain plane ; then
the rising of the Sun is made through all magnitudes in such a way that, from the first to
the last point, both the segments of the solar disk & the chords of the segments increase by
passing through all intermediate magnitudes. But, in my Theory, the Sun is not something
continuous, but is an aggregate of points separate from one another, which rise, one after
the other, above that imaginary plane, with some interval of time between them in all
cases. Hence accurate continuity does not fit this case, & it is only observed in the case
of the distances from the imaginary plane of the single points that compose the mass of the
Sun. Yet Nature, even here, tries to maintain a sort of continuity ; for instance, the
little points are so very near to one another, & so evenly spread & placed that, even in
this case, we have a certain apparent continuity, and even in this distribution, on which
the density depends, there do not occur any very great sudden changes.

144. Innumerable examples of this apparent continuity could be brought forward, in Examples of con-
which the matter comes about in the same manner. Thus, in the channels of rivers, the ^"reiy apparent'3
bends in foliage, the angles in salts, crystals and other bodies, in the tips of the claws that its origin,
appear to the naked eye to be very sharp in the case of certain animals ; if a microscope

were used to examine them, in no case would the point appear to be quite abrupt, or the
angle altogether sharp, but in every case somewhat rounded, & so possessing a definite
curvature & apparently approximating to continuity. Nevertheless in all these cases
there is nowhere true continuity according to my Theory ; for all bodies of this kind are
composed of points that are indivisible & separated from one another ; & these cannot
form a continuous surface ; & with them, if any three points are supposed to be joined
by straight lines, then a triangle will result that in every case has three sharp angles. But
I consider that from the accurate continuity of motions & forces a very close approximation
of this kind arises also in the case of masses ; &, if the great number of possible cases are
compared with one another, it is sufficient for me to have just pointed it out.

145. Hence it becomes evident how we are to refute certain cases, relating to this The. continuity of
matter, in which it might be considered that the Law of Continuity was violated. When ™uous lines ""is
light falls upon a plane mirror, part is refracted & part is reflected. In reflection & nowhere inter-
refraction, according to the idea held in olden times, & even now credited by some people, rup e
namely, that it took place by means of impulse & immediate collision, there would be

a breach of continuous motion through one straight line being suddenly changed for
another. But already Newton has discussed this point, & has removed any sudden change
of this sort, by explaining the phenomena by means of forces acting at a distance ; with
these it comes about that any particle of light will have its path bent little by little as it
approaches a reflecting or refracting surface. Hence, the law of approach and recession,
the velocity, the alteration of direction, all change in accordance with the Law of Continuity.
Nay indeed, in my Theory, this alteration of direction does not only begin in the immediate
neighbourhood, but any point of matter from the time that the world began has described
a single continuous orbit, depending on the continuous law of forces, represented in Fig. i,
a law that extends to all distances whatever. I also consider that this continuity of path
is undisturbed by any voluntary mental forces, which also cannot be exerted by us except
in accordance with the Law of Continuity. Hence it comes about that, just as I exclude
all idea of absolute rest, so I exclude all accurately rectilinear, circular, elliptic, or parabolic
motions. This too ought to be the general opinion of all others ; for it is quite easy to show
that there is everywhere some perturbation, & reasons for alteration, which do not allow
us to have accurate paths along such simple lines for our motions.

146. Just as in all the cases I have mentioned, & in others like them, Nature always Apparent discon-

'.-,,, J .. i • i • i i • i tinuity in diffusion

in my Theory observes the most accurate continuity, so also is this done here in the case Of renected and re-

of the reflection and refraction of light. But there is another thing in this connection, fracted light.

in which there seems to be a breach of continuity ; & anyone who considers the matter

fairly deeply, will think at first that Nature has observed accurate continuity, but on further

consideration will find that Nature has only endeavoured to do so, & has not actually

observed it ; that is to say, in the diffusion of light, & its density. At first sight the ray

seems to be divided into two parts, which leave a gap between them & diverge from one

another as it were suddenly, the one part being reflected & the other part refracted

without any intermediate bending of the path. It also seems that another sudden change

must be admitted ; for suppose that a beam of light falls upon a prism, & part of it is

reflected & the rest is transmitted & issues from the second surface, and that then the

prism is gradually rotated ; when a certain angle of rotation is reached, light, having

a given refrangibility, is no longer transmitted, but is totally reflected. Here also it

seems that there is a sudden transition from the first case in which the angles made^with

the surface by the issuing rays are always less than the angle of incidence, & lie on

the far side of the surface, to the latter case in which the angles of reflection are equal to

120 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

incidentiae, & jacentem citra, sine ulla reflexione in angulis intermediis minoribus ab ipsa
superficie ad ejusmodi finitum angulum.

Apparens concili- 14.7. Huic cuidam velut laesioni continuitatis videtur responderi posse per illam lucem

Unuitafe pel radios qua3 reflectitur, vel refrin-[67]-gitur irregulariter in quibusvis angulis. Jam olim enim
irregulariter disper- observatum est illud, ubi lucis radius reflectitur, non reflecti totum ita, ut angulus
reflexionis aequetur angulo incidentiae, sed partem dispergi quaquaversus ; quam ob causam
si Solis radius in partem quandam speculi incurrat, quicunque est in conclavi, videt, qui sit
ille locus, in quern incurrit radius, quod utique non fieret, nisi e solaribus illis directis radiis
etiam ad oculum ipsius radii devenirent, egressi in omnibus iis directionibus, quae ad omnes
oculi positiones tendunt ; licet ibi quidem satis intensum lumen non appareat, nisi in
directione faciente angulum reflexionis aequalem incidentiae, in qua resilit maxima luminis
pars. Et quidem hisce radiis redeuntibus in angulis hisce inaequalibus egregie utitur
Newtonus in fine Opticae ad explicandos colores laminarum crassarum : & eadem irregularis
dispersio in omnes plagas ad sensum habetur in tenui parte, sed tamen in aliqua, radii
refracti. Hinc inter vividum ilium reflexum radium, & refractum, habetur intermedia
omnis ejusmodi radiorum series in omnibus iis intermediis angulis prodeuntium, & sic etiam
ubi transitur a refractione ad reflexionem in totum, videtur per hosce intermedios angulos
res posse fieri citissimo transitu per ipsos, atque idcirco illaesa perseverare continuitas.

Cur ea apparens 148. Verum si adhuc altius perpendatur res ; patebit in ilia intermedia serie non haberi

dSitio1 pe^contiii- accuratam continuitatem, sed apparentem quandam, quam Natura affectat, non accurate

ujtatem yiae cujus- servat illaesam. Nam lumen in mea Theoria non est corpus quoddam continuum, quod

vis puncti diffundatur continue per illud omne spatium, sed est aggregatum punctorum a se invicem

disjunctorum, atque distantium, quorum quodlibet suam percurrit viam disjunctam a

proximi via per aliquod intervallum. Continuitas servatur accuratissime in singulorum

punctorum viis, non in diffusione substantiae non continuae, & quo pacto ea in omnibus iis

motibus servetur, & mutetur, mutata inclinatione incidentiae, via a singulis punctis descripta

sine saltu, satis luculenter exposui in secunda parte meae dissertationis De Lumine a num. 98.

Sed haec ad applicationem jam pertinent Theoriae ad Physicam.

QUO pacto servetur 149. Haud multum absimiles sunt alii quidam casus, in quibus singula continuitatem

bu^dam^casibusTui observant, non aggregatum utique non continuum, sed partibus disjunctis constans.
quibus videtur tedi. Hujusmodi est ex. gr. altitude cujusdam domus, quae aedificatur de novo, cui cum series
nova adjungitur lapidum determinatae cujusdam altitudinis, per illam additionem repente
videtur crescere altitude domus, sine transitu per altitudines intermedias : & si dicatur id
non esse Naturae opus, sed artis ; potest difficultas transferri facile ad Naturae opera, ut ubi
diversa inducuntur glaciei strata, vel in aliis incrustationibus, ac in iis omnibus casibus, in
quibus incrementum fit per externam applicationem partium, ubi accessiones finitae videntur
acquiri simul totae sine [68] transitu per intermedias magnitudines. In iis casibus
continuitas servatur in motu singularum partium, quae accedunt. Illae per lineam quandam
continuam, & continua velocitatis mutatione accedunt ad locum sibi deditum : quin immo
etiam posteaquam eo advenerunt, pergunt adhuc moveri, & nunquam habent quietem nee
absolutam, nee respectivam respectu aliarum partium, licet jam in respectiva positione
sensibilem mutationem non subeant : parent nimirum adhuc viribus omnibus, quae
respondent omnibus materiae punctis utcunque distantibus, & actio proximarum partium,
quae novam adhaesionem parit, est continuatio actionis, quam multo minorem exercebant,
cum essent procul. Hoc autem, quod pertineant ad illam domum, vel massam, est aliquid
non in se determinatum, quod momento quodam determinato fiat, in quo saltus habeatur,
sed ab aestimatione quadam pendet nostrorum sensuum satis crassa ; ut licet perpetuo
accedant illae partes, & pergant perpetuo mutare positionem respectu ipsius massae ; turn
incipiant censeri ut pertinentes ad illam domum, vel massam : cum desinit respectiva
mutatio esse sensibilis, quae sensibilitatis cessatio fit ipsa etiam quodammodo per gradus
omnes, & continue aliquo tempore, non vero per saltum.

Generate responsio ISO- Hinc distinctius ibi licebit difHcultatem omnem amovere dicendo, non servari

de emta.3 similes m" mutationem continuam in magnitudinibus earum rerum, quae continuae non sunt, &

magnitudinem non habent continuam, sed sunt aggregata rerum disjunctarum ; vel in iis

rebus, quae a nobis ita censentur aliquod totum constituere, ut magnitudinem aggregati non

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 121

the angles of incidence & lie on the near side of the surface, without any reflection for
rays at intermediate angles with the surface less than a certain definite angle.

147. It seems that an explanation of this apparent breach of continuity can be given Apparent recontiii-
by means of light that is reflected or refracted irregularly at all sorts of angles. For long ago of Continuity6 effect
it was observed that, when a ray of light is reflected, it is not reflected entirely in such a *ed fay means of
manner that the angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence, but that a part of it

is dispersed in all directions. For this reason, if a ray of light from the Sun falls upon some
part of a mirror, anybody who is in the room sees where the ray strikes the mirror ; &
this certainly would not be the case, unless some of the solar rays reached his eye directly
issuing from the mirror in all those directions that reach to all positions that the eye might
be in. Nevertheless, in this case the light does not appear to be of much intensity, unless
the eye is in the position facing the angle of reflection equal to the angle of incidence, along
which the greatest part of the light rebounds. Newton indeed employed in a brilliant
way these rays that issue at irregular angles at the end of his Optics to explain the colours
of solid laminae. The same irregular dispersion in all directions takes place as far as can
be observed in a small part, but yet in some part, of the refracted ray. Hence, in between
the intense reflected & refracted rays, we have a whole series of intermediate rays of this sort
issuing at all intermediate angles. Thus, when the transition is effected from refraction
to total reflection, it seems that it can be done through these intermediate angles by an
extremely rapid transition through them, & therefore continuity remains unimpaired.

148. But if we inquire into the matter yet more carefully, it will be evident that in Why this is only an
that intermediate series there is no accurate continuity, but only an apparent continuity ; atimT* the^true
& this Nature tries to maintain, but does not accurately observe it unimpaired. For, reconciliation is
in my Theory, light is not some continuous body, which is continuously diffused through t!nurtyhof ^ath^or
all the space it occupies ; but it is an aggregate of points unconnected with & separated any point of light,
from one another ; & of these points, any one pursues its own path, & this path is separated

from the path of the next point to it by a definite interval. Continuity is observed perfectly
accurately for the paths of the several points, not in the diffusion of a substance that is
not continuous ; & the manner in which continuity is preserved in all these motions,
& the path described by the several points is altered without sudden change, when the angle
of incidence is altered, I have set forth fairly clearly in the second part of my dissertation
De Lumine, Art. 98. But in this work these matters belong to the application of the
Theory to physics.

140. There are certain cases, not greatly unlike those already given, in which each The manner in

/ i _j« i_ • '• V j r which continuity

part preserves continuity, but not so the whole, which is not continuous but composed ot is maintained m

separate parts. For an instance of this kind, take the height of a new house which is being certain cases in

built ; as a fresh layer of stones of a given height is added to it, the height of the house ^

on account of that addition seems to increase suddenly without passing through intermediate

heights. If it is said that that is not a work of Nature, but of art ; then the same difficulty

can easily be transferred to works of Nature, as when different strata of ice are formed, or

in other incrustations, and in all cases in which an increment is caused by the external

application of parts, where finite additions seem to be acquired all at once without any

passage through intermediate magnitudes. In these cases the continuity is preserved in

the motions of the separate parts that are added. These reach the place allotted to them

along some continuous line & with a continuous change of velocity. Further, after they

have reached it, they still continue to move, & never have absolute rest ; no, nor even

relative rest with respect to the other parts, although they do not now suffer a sensible

change in their relative positions. Thus, they still submit to the action of all the forces

that correspond to all points of matter at any distances whatever ; and the action of the

parts nearest to them, which produces a new adhesion, is the continuation of the action

that they exert to a far smaller extent when they are some distance away. Moreover, in

the fact that they belong to that house or mass, there is something that is not determinate

in itself, because it happens at a determinate instant in which the sudden change takes

place ; but it depends on a somewhat rough assessment by our senses. So that, although

these parts are continually being added, & continually go on changing their position

with respect to the mass, they both begin to be thought of as belonging to that house or

mass, & the relative change ceases to be sensible ; also this cessation of sensibility itself

also takes place to some extent through all stages, and in some continuous interval of time,

& not by a sudden jump.

KO. From this consideration we may here in a clearer manner remove all difficulty

-' * . , . - •jrt,'U* simuar cd.b

by saying that a continuous change is not maintained in the magnitudes ot those tmngs, derived from this,
which are not themselves continuous, & do not possess continuous magnitude, but are
aggregates of separate things. That is to say, in those things that are thus considered as
forming a certain whole, in such a way that the magnitude of the aggregate is not determined

122

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

determinent distantias inter eadem extrema, sed a nobis extrema ipsa assumantur jam alia,
jam alia, quae censeantur incipere ad aggregatum pertinere, ubi ad quasdam distantias
devenerint, quas ut ut in se juxta legem continuitatis mutatas, nos a reliquis divellimus per
saltum, ut dicamus pertinere eas partes ad id aggregatum. Id accidit, ubi in objectis
casibus accessiones partium novae fiunt, atque ibi nos in usu vocabuli saltum facimus ; ars,
& Natura saltum utique habet nullum.

Alii casus in quibus 151. Non idem contingit etiam, ubi plantas, vel animantia crescunt, succo se insinuante

'uibusUr' hab'etur Per tubulos fibrarum, & procurrente, ubi & magnitude computata per distantias punctorum
soium proxima, non maxime distantium transit per omnes intermedias ; cum nimirum ipse procursus fiat
accurata contmm- pef omnes intermedias distantias. At quoniam & ibi mutantur termini illi, qui distantias
determinant, & nomen suscipiunt altitudinis ipsius plantas ; vera & accurata continuitas ne
ibi quidem observatur, nisi tantummodo in motibus, & velocitatibus, ac distantiis singularum
partium : quanquam ibi minus recedatur a continuitate accurata, quam in superioribus. In
his autem, & in illis habetur ubique ilia alia continuitas quasdam apparens, & affectata
tantummodo a Natura, quam intuemur etiam in progressu substantiarum, ut incipiendo ab
inanima-[69]-tis corporibus progressu facto per vegetabilia, turn per quasdam fere
semianimalia torpentia, ac demum animalia perfectiora magis, & perfectiora usque ad simios
homini tarn similes. Quoniam & harum specierum, ac existentium individuorum in quavis
specie numerus est finitus, vera continuitas haberi non potest, sed ordinatis omnibus in
seriem quandam, inter binas quasque intermedias species hiatus debet esse aliquis necessario,
qui continuitatem abrumpat. In omnibus iis casibus habentur discretas quasdam quantitates,
non continues ; ut & in Arithmetica series ex. gr. naturalium numerorum non est continua,
sed discreta ; & ut ibi series ad continuam reducitur tantummodo, si generaliter omnes
intermedias fractiones concipiantur ; sic & in superiore exemplo quasdam velut continua
series habebitur tantummodo ; si concipiantur omnes intermedias species possibiles.

uitatem.

Conciusio pertinens 152. Hoc pacto excurrendo per plurimos justmodi casus, in quibus accipiuntur

ad ea, quse veram, aggregata rerum a se invicem certis intervallis distantium, & unum aliquid continuum non

(X CcL, CJ1.13E cLttCCtcl" OO O •••iill**

tam habent contin- constituentium, nusquam accurata occurret continuitatis lex, sed per quandam dispersionem
quodammodo affectata, & vera continuitas habebitur tantummodo in motibus, & in iis, quas
a motibus pendent, uti sunt distantiae, & vires determinatas a distantiis, & velocitates a
viribus ortae ; quam ipsam ob causam ubi supra num. 39 inductionem pro lege continuitatis
assumpsimus, exempla accepimus a motu potissimum, & ab iis, quae cum ipsis motibus
connectuntur, ac ab iis pendent.

153. Sed jam ad aliam difficultatem gradum faciam, quae non nullis negotium ingens
3ito facessit, & obvia est etiam, contra hanc indivisibilium, & inextensorum punctorum Theoriam ;
' & quod nimirum ea nullum habitura sint discrimen a spiritibus. Ajunt enim, si spiritus
ejusmodi vires habeant, praestituros eadem phaenomena, tolli nimirum corpus, & omnem
corporeae substantiae notionem sublata extensione continua, quae sit prascipua materias
proprietas ita pertinens ad naturam ipsius ; ut vel nihil aliud materia sit, nisi substantia
praedita extensione continua ; vel saltern idea corporis, & materiae haberi non ppssit ; nisi
in ea includatur idea extensionis continuae. Multa hie quidem congeruntur simul, quae
nexum aliquem inter se habent, quae hie seorsum evolvam singula.

Difficultates petitae
a discrimine debito
inter materiam
spiritum.

DifferrehKcpuncta 154. Inprimis falsum omnino est, nullum esse horum punctorum discrimen a spiritibus.

fm^netrabUttlte^ Discrimen potissimum materiae a spiritu situm est in hisce duobus, quod _ materia_ est

™nSitatem,a e£- sensibilis, & incapax cogitationis, ac voluntatis, spiritus nostros sensus non afficit, & cogitare

capadtatem cogit- pOtest) ac velle. Sensibilitas autem non ab extensione continua oritur, sed ab impene-

trabilitate, qua fit, ut nostrorum organorum fibrae tendantur a corporibus, quae ipsis

sistuntur, & motus ad cerebrum pro-[7o]-pagetur. Nam si extensa quidem essent corpora,

sed impenetrabilitate carerent ; manu contrectata fibras non sisterent, nee motum ullum

in iis progignerent, ac eadem radios non reflecterent, sed liberum intra se aditum luci

prasberent. Porro hoc discrimen utrumque manere potest integrum, & manet inter mea

indivisibilia hasc puncta, & spiritus. Ipsa impenetrabilitatem habent, & sensus nostros

afficiunt, ob illud primum crus asymptoticum exhibens vim illam repulsivam primam ;

spiritus autem, quos impenetrabilitate carere credimus, ejusmodi viribus itidem carent, &

sensus nostros idcirco nequaquam afficiunt, nee oculis inspectantur, nee ^manibus palpari

possunt. Deinde in meis hisce punctis ego nihil admitto aliud, nisi illam virium legem cum

inertias vi conjunctam, adeoque ilia volo prorsus incapacia cogitationis, & voluntatis.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

I23

by the distances between the same extremes all the time, but the extremes we take are
different, one after another ; & these are considered to begin to belong to the aggregate
when they attain to certain distances from it ; &, although in themselves changed in
accordance with the Law of Continuity, we separate them from the rest in a discontinuous
manner, by saying that these parts belong to the aggregate. This comes about, whenever
in the cases under consideration fresh additions of parts take place ; & then we make a
discontinuity in the use of a term ; art, as well as Nature, has no discontinuity.

151. It is not the same thing however in the case of the growth of plants or animals,
which is due to a life-principle insinuating itself into, & passing along the fine tubes of the
fibres ; here the magnitude, calculated by means of the distance between the points furthest
from one another, passes through all intermediate distances ; for the flow of the life-principle
takes place indeed through all intermediate distances. But, since here also the extremes
are changed, which determine the distances, & denominate the altitude of the plant ;
not even in this case is really accurate continuity observed, except only in the motions &
velocities and distances of the separate parts ; however there is here less departure from
accurate continuity, than there was in the examples given above. In both there is indeed
that kind of apparent continuity, which Nature does no more than try to maintain ; such
as we also see in the series of substantial things, which starting from inanimate bodies,
continues through vegetables, then through certain sluggish semianimals, & lastly, through
animals more & more perfect, up to apes that are so like to man. Also, since the number
of these species, & the number of existent individuals of any species, is finite, it is impossible
to have true continuity ; but if they are all ordered in a series, between any two intermediate
species there must necessarily be a gap ; & this will break the continuity. In all these
cases we have certain discrete, & not continuous, quantities ; just as, for instance, the
arithmetical series of the natural numbers is not continuous, but discrete. Also, just as the
series is reduced to continuity only by mentally introducing in general all the intermediate
fractions ; so also, in the example given above a sort of continuous series is obtained, if
& only if all intermediate possible species are so included.

152. In the same way, if we examine a large number of cases of the same kind, in which
aggregates of things are taken, separated from one another by certain definite intervals,
& not composing a single continuous whole, an accurate continuity law will never be
met with, but only a sort of counterfeit depending on dispersion. True continuity will
only be obtained in motions, & in those things that depend on motions, such as distances
& forces determined by distances, & velocities derived from such forces. It was for
this very reason that, when we adopted induction for the proof of the Law of Continuity
in Art. 39 above, we took our examples mostly from motion, & from those things which
are connected with motions & depend upon them.

153. Now I will pass on to another objection, which some people have made a great
to-do about, and which has also been raised in opposition to this Theory of indivisible &
non-extended points ; namely, that there will be no difference between my points &
spirits. For, they say that, if spirits were endowed with such forces, they would show the
same phenomena as bodies, & that bodies & all idea of corporeal substance would be
done away with by denying continuous extension ; for this is one of the chief properties of
matter, so pertaining to Nature itself ; so that either matter is nothing else but substance
endowed with continuous extension, or the idea of a body and of matter cannot be obtained
without the inclusion of the idea of continuous extension. Here indeed there are many
matters all jumbled together, which have no connection with one another ; these I will
now separate & discuss individually.

154. First of all it is altogether false that there is no difference between my points &
spirits. The most important difference between matter & spirit lies in the two facts,
that matter is sensible & incapable of thought, whilst spirit does not affect the senses,
but can think or will. Moreover, sensibility does not arise from continuous extension,
but from impenetrability, through which it comes about that the fibres of our organs are
subjected to stress by bodies that are set against them & motions are thereby propagated
to the brain. For if indeed bodies were extended, but lacked impenetrability, they would
not resist the fibres of the hand when touched, nor produce in them any motion ; nor
would they reflect light, but allow it an uninterrupted passage through themselves.
Further, it is possible that each of these distinctions should hold good independently ;
& they do so between these indivisible points of mine & spirits. My points have
impenetrability & affect our senses, because of that first asymptotic branch representing that
first repulsive force ; but spirits, which we suppose to lack impenetrability, lack also forces
of this kind, and therefore can in no wise affect our senses, nor be examined by the eyes,
nor be felt by the hands. Then, in these points of mine, I admit nothing else but the
law of forces conjoined with the force of inertia ; & hence I intend them to be incapable

Cases in which
there is a breach of
continuity ; others
in which the con-
tinuity is only very
nearly, but not
accurately, ob-
served.

Conclusion as re-
gards those things
that possess true
continuity, and
those that have a
counterfeit continu-
ity.

Objections derived
from the distinc-
tion that has to be
made between
matter & spirit.

These points differ
from spirits on
account o f their
impenet rability,
their being sen-
sible, & their inca-
pacity for thought.

I24

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Si possibilis sub-

earn nee
materiam
spiritum.

Quamobrem discrimen essentiae illud utrumque, quod inter corpus, & spiritum
agnoscunt omnes, id & ego agnosco, nee vero id ab extensione, & compositione continua
desumitur, sed ab iis, quae cum simplicitate, & inextensione aeque conjungi possunt, &
cohaerere cum ipsis.

155. At si substantiae capaces cogitationis & voluntatis haberent ejusmodi virium legem,
an non eosdem praestarent effectus respectu nostrorum sensuum, quos ejusmodi puncta ?
capax cogitationis ; Respondebo sane, me hie non quaerere, utrum impenetrabilitas, & sensibilitas, quae ab iis
fnec viribus pendent, conjungi possint cum facultate cogitandi, & volendi, quae quidem quaestio
eodem redit, ac in communi sententia de impenetrabilitate extensorum, ac compositorum
relata ad vim cogitandi, & volendi. Illud ajo, notionem, quam habemus partim ex
observationibus tarn sensuum respectu corporurh, quam intimae conscientiae respectu
spiritus, una cum reflexione, partim, & vero etiam circa spiritus potissimum, ex principiis
immediate revelatis, vel connexis cum principiis revelatis, continere pro materia
impenetrabilitatem, & sensibilitatem, una cum incapacitate cogitationis, & pro spiritu
incapacitatem afHcicndi per impenetrabilitatem nostros sensus, & potentiam cogitandi, ac
volendi, quorum priores illas ego etiam in meis punctis admitto, posteriores hasce in
spiritibus ; unde fit, ut mea ipsa puncta materialia sint, & eorum massae constituant
corpora a spiritibus longissime discrepantia. Si possibile sit illud substantiae genus, quod
& hujusmodi vires activas habeat cum inertia conjunctas, & simul cogitare possit, ac velle ;
id quidem nee corpus erit, nee spiritus, sed tertium quid, a corpore discrepans per capacitatem
cogitationis, & voluntatis, discrepans autem a spiritu per inertiam, & vires hasce nostras,
quae impenetrabilitatem inducunt. Sed, ut ajebam, ea quaestio hue non pertinet, & aliunde
resolvi debet ; ut aliunde utique debet resolvi quaestio, qua quaeratur, an substantia extensa,
& impenetrabilis [71] hasce proprietates conjungere possit cum facultate cogitandi,
volendique.

Nihil amitti, 156. Nee vero illud reponi potest, argumentum potissimum ad evincendum, materiam

amisso argumento cogitare non posse, deduci ab extensione, & partium compositione, quibus sublatis, omne id

eorum, qui a com- r to , . r, . • • VT • i

positione partium lundamentum prorsus corruere, & ad materialismum sterm viam. JNam ego sane non video,
deducunt incapaci- quid argument! peti possit ab extensione, & partium compositione pro incapacitate cogitandi,
& volendi. Sensibilitas, praecipua corporum, & materiae proprietas, quae ipsam adeo a
spiritibus discriminat, non ab extensione continua, & compositione partium pendet, uti
vidimus, sed ab impenetrabilitate, quae ipsa proprietas ab extensione continua, & compositione
non pendet. Sunt qui adhibent hoc argumentum ad excludendam capacitatem cogitandi
a materia, desumptum a compositione partium : si materia cogitaret ; singulae ejus partes
deberent singulas cogitationis partes habere, adeoque nulla pars objectum perciperet ; cum
nulla haberet earn perceptionis partem, quam habet altera. Id argumentum in mea Theoria
amittitur ; at id ipsum, meo quidem judicio, vim nullam habet. Nam posset aliquis
respondere, cogitationem totam indivisibilem existere in tota massa materiae, quae certa
partium dispositione sit praedita, uti anima rationalis per tarn multos Philosophos, ut ut
indivisibilis, in omni corpore, vel saltern in parte corporis aliqua divisibili existit, & ad
ejusmodi praesentiam praestandam certa indiget dispositione partium ipsius corporis, qua
semel laesa per vulnus, ipsa non potest ultra ibi esse ; atque ut viventis corporei, sive animalis
rationalis natura, & determinatio habetur per materiam divisibilem, & certo modo
constructam, una cum anima indivisibili ; ita ibi per indivisibilem cogitationem inhaerentem
divisibili materise natura, & determinatio cogitantis haberetur. Unde aperte constat eo
argumento amisso, nihil omnino amitti, quod jure dolendum sit.

Etiam si quidpiam 157. Sed quidquid de eo argumento censeri debeat, nihil refert, nee ad infirmandam

iam^poStive ^prob- Theoriam positivis, & validis argumentis comprobatam, ac e solidissimis principiis directa

ari, & in ea manere ratiocinatione deductani, quidquam potest unum, vel alterum argumentum amissum, quod

inte™m™ter1ainme& a^ probandam aliquam veritatem aliunde notam, & a revelatis principiis aut directe, aut

spiritum. indirecte confirmatam, ab aliquibus adhibeatur, quando etiam vim habeat aliquam, quam,

uti ostendi, superius allatum argumentum omnino non habet. Satis est, si ilia Theoria cum

ejusmodi veritate conjungi possit, uti haec nostra cum immaterialitate spirituum con-

jungitur optime, cum retineat pro materia inertiam, impenetrabilitatem, sensibilitatem,

incapacitatem cogitandi, & pro spiritibus retineat incapacitatem afHciendi sensus nostros

per impenetrabilitatem, & facultatem cogitandi, ac volendi. [72] Ego quidem in ipsius

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 125

of thought or will. Wherefore I also acknowledge each of those essential differences between
matter and spirit, which are acknowledged by everyone ; but by me it is not deduced from
extension and continuous composition, but, just as correctly, from things that can be
conjoined with simplicity & non-extension, & can combine with them.

155. Now if there were substances capable of thought & will that also had a law of if it were possible
forces of this kind, is it possible that they would produce the same effects with respect to substanc<Pthatwas
our senses, as points of this sort ? Truly, I will answer that I do not seek to know in this both endowed with
connection, whether impenetrability & sensibility, which depend on these forces, can capsTbieofthoughT
be conjoined with the faculty of thinking & willing ; indeed this question comes to the it would be neither
same thing as the general idea of the relations of impenetrability of extended & composite matter nor sP'nt-
things to the power of thinking & willing. I will say but this, that we form our ideas,

partly from observations, of the senses in the case of bodies, & of the inner consciousness
in the case of spirits, together with reflections upon them, partly, & indeed more especially
in the case of spirits, from directly revealed principles, or matters closely connected with
revealed principles ; & these ideas involve for matter impenetrability, sensibility, combined
with incapacity for thought, & for spirit an incapacity for affecting our senses by means
of impenetrability, together with the capacity for thinking and willing. I admit the former
of these in the case of my points, & the latter for spirits ; so that these points of mine
are material points, & masses of them compose bodies that are far different from spirits.
Now if it were possible that there should be some kind of substance, which has both active
forces of this kind together with a force of inertia & also at the same time is able to
think and will ; then indeed it will neither be body nor spirit, but some third thing, differing
from a body in its capacity for thought & will, & also from spirit by possessing inertia
and these forces of mine, which lead to compenetration. But as I was saying, that question
does not concern me now, & the answer must be found by other means. So by other
means also must the answer be found to the question, in which we seek to know whether
a substance that is extended & impenetrable can conjoin these two properties with the
faculty of thinking and willing.

156. Now it cannot be ignored that an argument of great importance in proving that Nothing is lost
matter is incapable of thought is deduced from extension & composition by parts ; & ^n ^g^^1"1^
if these are denied, the whole foundation breaks down, & the way is laid open to materialism, those who deduce
But really I do not see what in the way of argument can be derived from extension & i? °t&%~*yj;°r

... , *, i • i • i *ii* n *i "v v i_ • f lutJU5i*^ irom com-

composition by parts, to support incapacity for thinking and willing, bensibmty, the cruel position by parts.

property of bodies & of matter, which is so much different from spirits, does not depend

on continuous extension & composition by parts, as we have seen, but on impenetrability ;

& this latter property does not depend on continuous extension & composition. There

are some, who use the following argument, derived from composition by parts, to exclude

from matter the capacity for thought : — If matter were to think, then each of its parts

would have a separate part of the thought, & thus no part would have perception of the

object of thought ; for no part can have that part of the perception that another part has.

This argument is neglected in my Theory ; but the argument itself, at least so I think, is

unsound. For one can reply that the complete thought exists as an indivisible thing in

the whole mass of matter, which is endowed with a certain arrangement of parts, in^the

same way as the rational soul in the opinion of so many philosophers exists, although it is

indivisible, in the whole of the body, or at any rate in a certain divisible part of the body ;

& to maintain a presence of this kind there is need for a definite arrangement of the parts of

the body, which if at any time impaired by a wound would no longer exist there. Thus,

just as from the nature of a living body, or of a rational animal, determination arises from

matter that is divisible & constructed on a definite plan, in conjunction with an indivisible

mind ; so also in this case by means of indivisible thought inherent in the nature of divisible

matter, there is a propensity for thought. From this it is very plain that, if this

argument is dismissed, there will be nothing neglected that we have any reason to

regret.

157. But whatever opinion we are to form about this argument, it makes no difference, Even a something
nor can it weaken a Theory that has been corroborated by direct & valid arguments, & iheVheorrcln Cbe
deduced from the soundest principles by a straightforward chain of reasoning, if we leave P^J^. in&a dt^t
out one or other of the arguments, which have been used by some for the purpose of ^f^fi remain in
testing some truth that is otherwise known & confirmed by revealed principles either j^^fj*^
directly or indirectly ; even when the argument has some validity, which, as I have shown, matter & spirit.
that adduced above has not in any way. It is sufficient if that theory can be conjoined

with such a truth ; just as this Theory of mine can be conjoined in an excellent manner
with the immateriality of spirits. For it retains for matter inertia, impenetrability,
sensibility, & incapacity for thinking, & for spirits it retains the incapacity for affecting
our senses by impenetrability, & the faculty of thinking or willing. Indeed I assume the

126 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

materiae, & corporeae substantias definitione ipsa assumo incapacitatem cogitandi, & volendi,
& dico corpus massam compositam e punctis habentibus vim inertiae conjunctam cum
viribus activis expressis in fig. i,& cum incapacitate cogitandi, ac volendi, qua definitione
admissa, evidens est, materiam cogitare non posse ; quae erit metaphysica quaedam conclusio,
ea definitione admissa, certissima : turn ubi solae rationes physicae adhibeantur, dicam, haec
corpora, quae meos afficiunt sensus, esse materiam, quod & sensus afficiant per illas utique
vires, & non cogitent. Id autem deducam inde, quod nullum cogitationis indicium
praestent ; quae erit conclusio tantum physica, circa existentiam illius materiae ita definitae,
aeque physice certa, ac est conclusio, quae dicat lapides non habere levitatem, quod nunquam
earn prodiderint ascendendo sponte, sed semper e contrario sibi relict! descenderint.

Sensus omnino fain 158. Quod autem pertmet ad ipsam corporum, & materiae ideam, quae videtur exten-

^nultat^in^xten- si°nem continuam, & contactum partium involvere, in eo videntur mihi quidem Cartesian!
sionis, quam nobis inprimis, qui tantopere contra prasjudicia pugnare sunt visi, praejudiciis ipsis ante omnes
alios indulsisse. Ideam corporum habemus per sensus ; sensus autem de continuitate
accurata judicare omnino non possunt, cum minima intervalla sub sensus non cadant. Et
quidem omnino certo deprehendimus illam continuitatem, quam in plerisque corporibus
nobis objiciunt sensus nostri, nequaquam haberi. In metallis, in marmoribus, in vitris,
& crystallis continuitas nostris sensibus apparet ejusmodi, ut nulla percipiamus in iis vacua
spatiola, nullos poros, in quo tamen hallucinari sensus nostros manifesto patet, turn ex
diversa gravitate specifica, quae a diversa multitudine vacuitatum oritur utique, turn ex
eo, quod per ilia insinuentur substantiae plures, ut per priora oleum diffundatur, per
posteriora liberrime lux transeat, quod quidem indicat, in posterioribus hisce potissi-
mum ingentem pororum numerum, qui nostris sensibus delitescunt.

Fons prajudici- 159- Quamobrem jam ejusmodi nostrorum sensuum testimonium, vel potius noster

orum : haberi pro eorum ratiociniorum usus, in hoc ipso genere suspecta esse debent, in quo constat nos

nulhs in se, quas , .... . • 11- • v • • -i_

sunt nuiia in nostris decipi. Suspican igitur licet, exactam continuitatem sine urns spatiolis, ut in majonbus
sensibus : eorum corporibus ubique deest, licet sensus nostri illam videantur denotare, ita & in minimis
quibusvis particulis nusquam haberi, sed esse illusionem quandam sensuum tantummodo,
& quoddam figmentum mentis, reflexione vel non utentis, vel abutentis. Est enim
solemne illud hominibus, atque usitatum, quod quidem est maximorum praejudiciorum
fons, & origo praecipua, ut quidquid in nostris sensibus est nihil, habeamus pro nihilo
absolute. Sic utique per tot saecula a multis est creditum, & nunc etiam a vulgo creditur,
[73] quietem Telluris, & diurnum Solis, ac fixarum motum sensuum testimonio evinci,
cum apud Philosophos jam constet, ejusmodi qusestionem longe aliunde resolvendam esse,
quam per sensus, in quibus debent eaedem prorsus impressiones fieri, sive stemus & nos, &
Terra, ac moveantur astra, sive moveamur communi motu & nos, & Terra, ac astra
consistant. Motum cognoscimus per mutationem positionis, quam objecti imago habet
in oculo, & quietem per ejusdem positionis permanentiam. Tarn mutatio, quam
permanentia fieri possunt duplici modo : mutatio, primo si nobis immotis objectum movea-
tur ; & permanentia, si id ipsum stet : secundo, ilia, si objecto stante moveamur nos ; haec, si
moveamur simul motu communi. Motum nostrum non sentimus, nisi ubi nos ipsi motum
inducimus, ut ubi caput circumagimus, vel ubi curru delati succutimur. Idcirco habemus
turn quidem motum ipsum pro nullo, nisi aliunde admoneamur de eodem motu per causas,
quae nobis sint cognitae, ut ubi provehimur portu, quo casu vector, qui jam diu assuevit idese
littoris stantis, & navis promotae per remos, vel vela, corrigit apparentiam illius, terrceque
urbesque recedunt, & sibi, non illis, motum adjudicat.

Eorum correctio 160. Hinc Philosophus, ne fallatur, non debet primis hisce ideis acquirere, quas e

ubi deprehendatur, sensationibus haurimus, & ex illis deducere consectaria sine diligent! perquisitione, ac in ea

modoalc°umtlsaenn quae ab infantia deduxit, debet diligenter inquirere. Si inveniat, easdem illas sensuum

suum apparentia perceptiones duplici modo aeque fieri posse ; peccabit utique contra Logicae etiam naturalis

leges, si alterum modum prze altero pergat eligere, unice, quia alterum antea non viderat,

& pro nullo habuerat, & idcirco alteri tantum assueverat. Id vero accidit in casu nostro :

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 127

incapacity for thinking & willing in the very definition of matter itself & corporeal
substance ; & I say that a body is a mass composed of points endowed with a force of
inertia together with such active forces as are represented in Fig. i, & an incapacity for
thinking & willing. If this definition is taken, it is clear that matter cannot think ; &
this will be a sort of metaphysical conclusion, which will follow with absolute certainty
from the acceptation of the definition. Again, where physical arguments are alone employed,
I say that such bodies as affect our senses are matter, because they affect the senses
by means of the forces under consideration, & do not think. I also deduce the same
conclusion from the fact that they afford no evidence of thought. This will be a conclusion
that is solely physical with regard to the existence of matter so defined ; & it will be just
as physically true as the conclusion that says that stones do not possess levity, deduced from
the fact that they never display such a thing by an act of spontaneous ascent, but on the
contrary always descend if left to themselves.

158. With regard to the idea of bodies & matter, which seems to involve continuous The senses are
extension, it seems to me indeed that in this matter the Cartesians in particular, who have altogether at fault

. • r i i_ m the greatness of

appeared to impugn pre judgments with so much vigour, have given themselves up to these the continuity of

prejudgments more than anyone else. We obtain the idea of bodies through the senses ; f^^'^beiieve5''

and the senses cannot in any way judge on a matter of accurate continuity ; for very small

intervals do not fall within the scope of the senses. Indeed we quite take it for granted

that the continuity, which our senses meet with in a large number of bodies, does not really

exist. In metals, marble, glass & crystals there appears to our senses to be continuity,

of such sort that we do not perceive in them any little empty spaces, or pores ; but in this

respect the senses have manifestly been deceived. This is clear, both from their different

specific gravities, which certainly arises from the differences in the numbers of the empty

spaces ; & also from the fact that several substances will insinuate themselves through

their substance. For instance, oil will diffuse itself through the former, & light will pass

quite freely through the latter ; & this indeed indicates, especially in the case of the

latter, an immense number of pores ; & these are concealed from our senses.

159. Hence such evidence of our senses, or rather our employment of such arguments, The origin of pre-
must now lie open to suspicion in that class, in which it is known that we have been deceived, j^fjdered : as^o-
We may then suspect that accurate continuity without the presence of any little empty thing, which are
spaces — such as is certainly absent from bodies of considerable size, although our senses SSe1srases0ar^con-
seem to remark its presence — is also nowhere existent in any of their smallest particles ; cemed ; examples
but that it is merely an illusion of the senses, & a sort of figment of the brain through its °

not using, or through misusing, reflection. For it is a customary thing for men (& a
thing that is frequently done) to consider as absolutely nothing something that is nothing
as far as the senses are concerned ; & this indeed is the source & principal origin of
the greatest prejudices. Thus for many centuries it was credited by many, & still is
believed by the unenlightened, that the Earth is at rest, & that the daily motions of the
Sun & the fixed stars is proved by the evidence of the senses ; whilst among philosophers
it is now universally accepted that such a question has to be answered in a far different
manner from that by means of the senses. Exactly the same impressions are bound to be
obtained, whether we & the Earth stand still & the stars are moved, or we & the
Earth are moved with a common motion & the stars are at rest. We recognize motion
by the change of position, which the image of an object has in the eye ; and rest by the
permanence of that position. Now both the change & the permanence can come about
in two ways. Firstly, if we remain at rest, there is a change of position if the object is
moved, & permanence if it too is at rest ; secondly, if we move, there is a change if the
object is at rest, & permanence if we & it move with a motion common to both. We
do not feel ourselves moving, unless we ourselves induce the motion, as when we turn the
head, or when we are jolted as we are borne in a vehicle. Hence we consider that the
motion is nothing, unless we are made to notice in other ways that there is motion by causes
that are known to us. Thus, when " we leave the harbour" a passenger who has for some time
been accustomed to the idea of a shore remaining still, & of a ship being propelled by
oars or sails, corrects the apparent motion of the shore ; &, as " the land & buildings recede"
he attributes the motion to himself and not to them.

160. Hence, the philosopher, to avoid being led astray, must not seek to obtain from ^ctionjrf ^
these primary ideas that we derive from the senses, or deduce from them, consequential known that the
theorems, without careful investigation; & he must carefully study those things that matter^ ^annot^ be
he has deduced from infancy. If he find that these very perceptions by the senses can agreement with
come about in two ways, one of which is as probable as the other ; then he will certainly £hattheis £JV£ e£
commit an offence against the laws of natural logic, if he should proceed to choose one some other way.
method in preference to the other, solely for the reason that previously he had not seen

the one & took no account of it, & thus had become accustomed to the other. Now

128

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

sensationes habebuntur eaedem, sive materia constet punctis prorsus inextensis, & distantibus
inter se per intervalla minima, quae sensum fugiant, ac vires ad ilia intervalla pertinentes
organorum nostrorum fibras sine ulla sensibili interruptione afficiant, sive continua sit, &
per immediatum contactum agat. Patebit autem in tertia hujusce operis parte, quo pacto
proprietates omnes sensibiles corporum generales, immo etiam ipsorum prsecipua discrimina,
cum punctis hisce indivisibilibus conveniant, & quidem multo sane melius, quam in communi
sententia de continua extensione materiae. Quamobrem errabit contra rectae ratiocinationis
usum, qui ex praejudicio ab hujusce conciliationis, & alterius hujusce sensationum nostrarum
causae ignoratione inducto, continuam extensionem ut proprietatem necessariam corporum
omnino credat, & multo magis, qui censeat, materialis substantive ideam in ea ipsa continua
extensione debere consistere.

Ordo idearum, quas

esse per tactum.

161. Verum quo magis evidenter constet horum prsejudiciorum origo, afferam hie
dissertationis De Materia Divisibilita-\j4\-te, & Principiis Corporum, numeros tres inci-
piendo a 14, ubi sic : " utcunque demus, quod ego omnino non censeo, aliquas esse innatas
ideas, & non per sensus acquisitas ; illud procul dubio arbitror omnino certum, ideam
corporis, materiae, rei corporeae, rei materialis, nos hausisse ex sensibus. Porro ideas prims
omnium, quas circa corpora acquisivimus per sensus, fuerunt omnino eae, quas in nobis
tactus excitavit, & easdem omnium frequentissimas hausimus. Multa profecto in ipso
materno utero se tactui perpetuo offerebant, antequam ullam fortasse saporum, aut odorum,
aut sonorum, aut colorum ideam habere possemus per alios sensus, quarum ipsarum, ubi eas
primum habere ccepimus, multo minor sub initium frequentia fuit. Idese autem, quas per
tactum habuimus, ortae sunt ex phsenomenis hujusmodi. Experiebamur palpando, vel
temere impingendo resistentiam vel a nostris, vel a maternis membris ortam, quae cum
nullam interruptionem per aliquod sensibile intervallum sensui objiceret, obtulit nobis ideam
impenetrabilitatis, & extensionis continuae : cumque deinde cessaret in eadem directione,
alicubi resistentia, & secundum aliam directionem exerceretur ; terminos ejusdem quanti-
tatis concepimus, & figurse ideam hausimus."

Quae fuerint turn
consideranda : in-
fantia ad eas re-
flexiones, inepta : in
quo ea sita sit.

162. " Porro oriebantur haec phsenomena a corporibus e materia jam efformatis, non a
singulis materiae particulis, e quibus ipsa corpora componebantur. Considerandum
diligenter erat, num extensio ejusmodi esset ipsius corporis, non spatii cujusdam, per quod
particulae corpus efformantes diffunderentur : num ea particulse ipsae iisdem proprietatibus
essent praeditae : num resistentia exerceretur in ipso contactu, an in minimis distantiis sub
sensus non cadentibus vis aliqua impedimento esset, quae id ageret, & resistentia ante ipsum
etiam contactum sentiretur : num ejusmodi proprietates essent intrinsecae ipsi materiae, ex
qua corpora componuntur, & necessariae : an casu tantum aliquo haberentur, & ab extrinseco
aliquo determinante. Haec, & alia sane multa considerate diligentius oportuisset : sed erat
id quidem tempus maxime caliginosum, & obscurum, ac reflexionibus minus obviis minime
aptum. Praster organorum debilitatem, occupabat animum rerum novitas, phaenomenorum
paucitas, & nullus, aut certe satis tenuis usus in phaenomenis ipsis inter se comparandis, &
ad certas classes revocandis, ex quibus in eorum leges, & causas liceret inquirere & systema
quoddam efformare, quo de rebus extra nos positis possemus ferre judicium. Nam in hac
ipsa phaenomenorum inopia, in hac efformandi systematis difficultate, in hoc exiguo
reflexionum usu, magis etiam, quam in organorum imbecillitate, arbitror, sitam esse
infantiam."

inde [75] 163. "In hac tanta rerum caligine ea prima sese obtulerunt animo, quae^ minus
orta extensionis jta jndagine, minus intentis reflexionibus indigebant, eaque ipsa ideistoties repetitis altius

continuae ut essen- . . .-1

tiaiis, odorum, &c., impressa sunt, & tenacius adhaeserunt, & quendam veluti campum nacta prorsus vacuum,
ut accidentaiium. & acjhuc immunem, suo quodammodo jure quandam veluti possessionem inierunt. Inter-
valla, quae sub sensum nequaquam cadebant, pro nullis habita : ea, quorum ideae^ semper
simul conjunctae excitabantur, habita sunt pro iisdem, vel arctissimo, & necessario^ nexu
inter se conjunctis. Hinc illud effectum est, ut ideam extensionis continuae, ideam

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 129

that is just what happens in the case under consideration. The same sensations will be
experienced, whether matter consists of points that are perfectly non-extended & distant
from one another by very small intervals that escape the senses, & forces pertaining to
those intervals affect the nerves of our organs without any sensible interruption ; or
whether it is continuous and acts by immediate contact. Moreover it will be clearly shown,
in the third part of this work, how all the general sensible properties of bodies, nay even
the principal distinctions between them as well, will fit in with these indivisible points ;
& that too, in a much better way than is the case with the common idea of continuous
extension of matter. Wherefore he will commit an offence against the use of true reasoning,
who, from a prejudgment derived from this agreement & from ignorance of this alter-
native cause for our sensations, persists in believing that continuous extension is an
absolutely necessary property of bodies ; and much more so, one who thinks that
the very idea of material substance must depend upon this very same continuous
extension.

161. Now in order that the source of these prejudices may be the more clearly known, Order of the ideas
I will here quote, from the dissertation De Materice Divisibilitate & Princi-pii Corporum, ^£ b^ies^tte
three articles, commencing with Art. 14, where we have : — " Even if we allow (a thing quite first ideas come
opposed to my way of thinking) that some ideas are innate & are not acquired through o^ifch the SenSe
the senses, there is no doubt in my mind that it is quite certain that we derive the idea

of a body, of matter, of a corporeal thing, or a material thing, through the senses. Further,
the very first ideas, of all those which we have acquired about bodies through the senses,
would be in every circumstance those which have excited our sense of touch, & these
also are the ideas that we have derived on more occasions than any other ideas. Many
things continually present themselves to the sense of touch actually in the very womb of
our mothers, before ever perchance we could have any idea of taste, smell, sound, or colour,
through the other senses ; & of these latter, when first we commenced to have them,
there were to start with far fewer occasions for experiencing them. Moreover the ideas
which we have obtained through the sense of touch have arisen from phenomena of the
following kind. We experienced a resistance on feeling, or on accidental contact with, an
object ; & this resistance arose from our own limbs, or from those of our mothers. Now,
since this resistance offered no opposition through any interval that was perceptible to the
senses, it gave us the idea of impenetrability & continuous extension ; & then when
it ceased in the original direction at any place & was exerted in some other direction,
we conceived the boundaries of this quantity, & derived the idea of figure."

162. " Furthermore, these phenomena will have arisen from bodies already formed from Such things de-
matter, not from the single particles of matter of which the bodies themselves were composed. S^time ^tae tf
It would have to be considered carefully whether such extension was a property of the tude of inf'ancy^for
body itself, & not of some space through which the particles forming the body were su.fh. reflection ; on

j-rc JIT -11 i r i • i i • wnat they maY be

diffused ; whether the particles themselves were endowed with the same properties ; founded,
whether the resistance was exerted only on actual contact, or whether, at very small
distances such as did not fall within the scope of the senses, some force would act as a
hindrance & produce the same effect, and resistance would be felt even before actual
contact ; whether properties of this kind would be intrinsic in the matter of which the
bodies are composed, & necessary to its existence ; or only possessed in certain cases,
being due to some external influence. These, & very many other things, should have
been investigated most carefully ; but the period was indeed veiled in mist & obscurity
to a great degree, & very little fitted for aught but the most easy thought. In addition
to the weakness of the organs, the mind was occupied with the novelty of things & the
rareness of the phenomena ; & there was no, or certainly very little, use made of comparisons
of these phenomena with one another, to reduce them to definite classes, from which it
would be permissible to investigate their laws & causes & thus form some sort of system,
through which we could bring the judgment to bear on matters situated outside our own
selves. Now, in this very paucity of phenomena, in this difficulty in the matter of forming
a system, in this slight use of the powers of reflection, to a greater extent even than in the
lack of development of the organs, I consider that infancy consists."

163. " In this dense haze of things, the first that impressed themselves on the mind Thence Pr«J'u<^-

i 1*1 • -i i 11 i • • •• n i • mcnis> di c uci i vcu.

were those which required a less deep study & less intent investigation ; & these, since that continuity of
the ideas were the more often renewed, made the greater impression & became fixed J^^J1^ «S
the more firmly in the mind, & as it were took possession of, so to speak, a land that they continuity of odours
found quite empty & hitherto immune, by a sort of right of discovery. Intervals, which &c- * accidental.
in no wise came within the scope of the senses, were considered to be nothing ; those things,
the ideas of which were always excited simultaneously & conjointly, were considered
as identical, or bound up with one another by an extremely close & necessary bond.
Hence the result is that we have formed the idea of continuous extension, the idea of

130 PHILOSOPHISE NATURALIS THEORIA

impenetrabilitatis prohibentis ulteriorem motum in ipso tantum contactu corporibus
affinxerimus, & ad omnia, quae ad corpus pertinent, ac ad materiam, ex qua ipsum constat,
temere transtulerimus : quse ipsa cum primum insedissent animo, cum frequcntissimis, immo
perpetuis phaenomenis, & experimentis confirmarentur ; ita tenaciter sibi invicem
adhseserunt, ita firmiter ideae corporum immixta sunt, & cum ea copulata ; ut ea ipsa pro
primis corporibus, & omnium corporearum rerum, nimirum etiam materiae corpora compo-
nentis, ejusque partium proprietatibus maxime intrinsecis, & ad naturam, atque essentiam
earundem pertinentibus, & turn habuerimus, & nunc etiam habeamus, nisi nos praejudiciis
ejusmodi liberemus. Extensionem nimirum continuam, impenetrabilitatem ex contactu,
compositionem ex partibus, & figuram, non solum naturae corporum, sed etiam corporeae
materiae, & singulis ejusdem partibus, tribuimus tanquam proprietates essentiales : csetera,
quae serius, & post aliquem reflectendi usum deprehendimus, colorem, saporem, odorem
sonum, tanquam accidentales quasdam, & adventitias proprietates consideravimus."

propositiones 164. Ita ego ibi, ubi Theoriam virium deinde refero, quam supra hie exposui, ac ad

Theoriam°continen? Pr3ecipuas corporum proprietates applico, quas ex ilia deduco, quod hie praestabo in parte
tis. tertia. Ibi autem ea adduxeram ad probandam primam e sequentibus propositionibus,

quibus probatis & evincitur Theoria mea, & vindicatur : sunt autem hujusmodi : i. Nullo
prorsus argumento evincitur materiam habere extensionem continuam, W non potius constare e
punctis prorsus indivisibilibus a se per aliquod intervallum distantibus ; nee ulla ratio seclusis
pr&judiciis suadet extensionem ipsam continuam potius, quam compositionem e punctis prorsus
indivisibilibus, inextensis, y nullum continuum extensum constituentibus. 2. Sunt argumenta,
y satis valida ilia quidem, qua hanc compositionem e punctis indivisibilibus evincant extensioni
ipsi continues pr&ferri oportere.

Quo pacto con- 165. At quodnam extensionis genus erit istud, quod e punctis inextensis, & spatio

coaiescan^lnmassas imaginario, sive puro nihilo [76] constat ? Quo pacto Geometria locum habere poterit,
tenaces: transitus ubi nihil habetur reale continue extensum? An non punctorum ejusmodi in vacuo
damPartem secun" innatantium congeries erit, ut quaedam nebula unico oris flatu dissolubilis prorsus sine ulla
consistent! figura, solidate, resistentia ? Haec quidem pertinent ad illud extensionis ,&
cohaesionis genus, de quo agam in tertia parte, in qua Theoriam applicabo ad Physicam, ubi
istis ipsis difficultatibus faciam satis. Interea hie illud tantummodo innuo in antecessum, me
cohaesionem desumere a limitibus illis, in quibus curva virium ita secat axem, ut a repulsione
in minoribus distantiis transitus fiat ad attractionem in majoribus. Si enim duo puncta
sint in distantia alicujus limitis ejus generis, & vires, quae immutatis distantiis oriuntur, sint
satis magnae, curva secante axem ad angulum fere rectum, & longissime abeunte ab ipso ;
ejusmodi distantiam ea puncta tuebuntur vi maxima ita, ut etiam insensibiliter compressa
resistant ulteriori compressioni, ac distracta resistant ulteriori distractioni ; quo pacto si
multa etiam puncta cohaereant inter se, tuebuntur utique positionem suam, & massam
constituent formae tenacissimam, ac eadem prorsus phsenomena exhibentem, quae exhiberent
solidae massulae in communi sententia. Sed de hac re uberius, uti monui, in parte tertia :
nunc autem ad secundam faciendus est gradus.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 131

impenetrability preventing further motion only on the absolute contact of bodies ; &
then we have heedlessly transferred these ideas to all things that pertain to a solid body,
and to the matter from which it is formed. Further, these ideas, from the time when they
first entered the mind, would be confirmed by very frequent, not to say continual, phenomena
& experiences. So firmly are they mutually bound up with one another, so closely are
they intermingled with the idea of solid bodies & coupled with it, that we at the time
considered these two things as being just the same as primary bodies, & as peculiarly
intrinsic properties of all corporeal things, nay further, of the very matter from which
bodies are composed, & of its parts ; indeed we shall still thus consider them, unless we
free ourselves from prejudgments of this nature. To sum up, we have attributed continuous
extension, impenetrability due to actual contact, composition by parts, & shape, as if
they were essential properties, not only to the nature of bodies, but also to corporeal matter
& every separate part of it ; whilst others, which we comprehend more deeply & as
a consequence of some considerable use of thought, such as colour, taste, smell & sound,
we have considered as accidental or adventitious properties."

164. Such are the words I used ; & then I stated the Theory of forces which I have A pair of proposi-
expounded in the previous articles of this work, and I applied the theory to the principal tation0f containing
properties of bodies, deducing them from it ; & this I will set forth in the third part the whole of ™y
of the present work. In the dissertation I had brought forward the arguments quoted *"

in order to demonstrate the truth of the first of the following theorems. If these theorems
are established, then my Theory is proved & verified; they are as follows : — i. There is
absolutely no argument that can be brought forward to prove that matter has continuous extension,
y that it is not rather made up of perfectly indivisible points separated from one another by
a definite interval ; nor is there any reason apart from prejudice in favour of continuous extension
in preference to composition from points that are perfectly indivisible, non-extended, & forming
no extended continuum of any sort. 2. There are arguments, W fairly strong ones too, which
will prove that this composition from indivisible points is preferable to continuous extension.

165. Now what kind of extension can that be which is formed out of non-extended The manner in

o • • t i • 5 TT /-i 1111 which groups of

points & imaginary space, i.e., out of pure nothing ? How can Geometry be upheld points coalesce into
if no thing is considered to be actually continuously extended ? Will not groups of points, tenacious masses :

n • • t i • 11-1 i i T i • • i i i n & then we pass on

floating in an empty space of this sort be like a cloud, dissolving at a single breath, & to the second part.

absolutely without a consistent figure, or solidity, or resistance ? These matters pertain

to that kind of extension & cohesion, which I will discuss in the third part, where I apply

my Theory to physics & deal fully with these very difficulties. Meanwhile I will here

merely remark in anticipation that I derive cohesion from those limit-points, in which the

curve of forces cuts the axis, in such a way that a transition is made from repulsion at smaller

distances to attraction at greater distances. For if two points are at the distance that

corresponds to that of any of the limit-points of this kind, & the forces that arise when

the distances are changed are great enough (the curve cutting the axis almost at right angles

& passing to a considerable distance from it), then the points will maintain this distance

apart with a very great force ; so that when they are insensibly compressed they will resist

further compression, & when pulled apart they resist further separation. In this way

also, if a large number of points cohere together, they will in every case maintain their

several positions, & thus form a mass that is most tenacious as regards its form ; & this

mass will exhibit exactly the same phenomena as little solid masses, as commonly understood,

exhibit. But I will discuss this more fully, as I have remarked, in the third part ; for now

we must pass on to the second part.

[77] PARS II
Theories *Applicato ad Mechanicam

Ante appHcatipnem 166. Considerabo in hac secunda parte potissimum generates quasdam leges aequilibrii
consideratio'curvs! & motus tam punctorum, quam massarum, quae ad Mechanicam utique pertinent, & ad
plurima ex iis, quae in elementis Mechanics passim traduntur, ex unico principio, & adhibito
constant! ubique agendi modo, demonstranda viam sternunt pronissimam. Sed prius
praemittam nonnulla quae pertinent ad ipsam virium curvam, a qua utique motuum,
phaenomena pendent omnia.

Quid in ea con- 167. In ea curva consideranda sunt potissimum tria, arcus curvae, area comprehensa
siderandum. inter axemj & arcum, quam general ordinata continue fluxu, ac puncta ilia, in quibus

curva secat axem.

Diversa arcnum 1 68. Quod ad arcus pcrtinet, alii dici possunt repulsivi, & alii attractivi, prout nimirum

asymptotic! "tiam Jacent ac* partes cruris asymptotici ED, vel ad contrarias, ac terminant ordinatas exhibentes

numero infiniti. vires repulsivas, vel attractivas. Primus arcus ED debet omnino esse asymptoticus ex

parte repulsiva, & in infinitum productus : ultimus TV, si gravitas cum lege virium

reciproca duplicata distantiarum protenditur in infinitum, debet itidem esse asymptoticus

ex parte attractiva, & itidem natura sua in infinitum productus. Reliquos figura I exprimit

omnes finitos. Verum curva Geometrica etiam ejus naturae, quam exposuimus, posset habere

alia itidem asymptotica crura, quot libuerit, ut si ordinata mn in H abeat in infinitum.

Sunt nimirum curvae continuae, & uniformis naturae, quae asymptotes habent plurimas,

& habere possunt etiam numero infinitas. (')

Arcus intermedii. [78] 169. Arcus intermedii, qui se contorquent circa axem, possunt etiam alicubi,
ubi ad ipsum devenerint, retro redire, tangendo ipsum, atque id ex utralibet parte, &
possent itidem ante ipsum contactum inflecti, & redire retro, mutando accessum in recessum,
ut in fig. i. videre est in arcu P^R.

Arcus prostremus 170. Si gravitas gencralis legem vis proportionalis inverse quadrate distantiae, quam
36 non accurate servat, sed quamproxime, uti diximus in priore parte, retinet ad sensum non
mutatam solum per totum planetarium, & cometarium systema, fieri utique poterit, ut
curva virium non habeat illud postremum crus asymptoticum TV, habens pro asymptoto
ipsam rectam AC, sed iterum secet axem, & se contorqueat circa ipsum.(*) Turn vero inter

(i) S»* ex. gr. in fig. 12. cyclois continua CDEFGH (3e., quam generet punctum peripheries circuli continue revoluti
supra rectam AB, qute natura sua protenditur utrinque in infinitum, adeoque in infinitis punctis C, E, G, I, &c. occurrit
basi AB. Si ubicunque ducatur qutevis ordinata PQ, productaturque in R ita, ut sit PR tertia post PQ, y datam quampiam
rectam ; punctum R frit ad curvam continuum constantem totidem ramis MNO, VXY, yr., quot erunt arcus Cycloidales
CDE, EFG, i3c,, quorum ramorum singuli habebunt bina crura asymptotica, cum ordinata PQ in accessu ad omnia puncta,
C, E, G, &c. decrescat ultra quoscunque Unites, adeoque ordinata PR crescat ultra limites quoscunque. Erunt hie quidem
omnes asymptoti CK, EL, GS &c. parallels inter se, & perpendiculares basi AB, quod in aliis curvis non est necessarium,
cum etiam divergentes utcunque possint esse. Erunt autem y totidem numero, quot puncta. ilia C, E, G &c., nimirum
infinite. Eodem autem pacto curvarum quarumlibet singuli occursus cum axe in curvis per eas hac eadem lege genitis
bina crura asymptotica generant, cruribus ipsis jacentibus, vel, ut hie, ad eandem axis partem, ubi curva genetrix ab eo
regreditur retro post appulsum, vel etiam ad partes oppositas, ubi curva genetrix ipsum secet, ac transiliat : cumque possit
eadem curva altiorum generum secari in punctis plurimis a recta, vel contingi ; poterunt utique haberi y rami asymptotici
in curva eadem continua, quo libuerit data numero.

(k)Nam ex ipsa Geometrica continuitate, quam persecutus sum in dissertatione De Lege Continuitatis, y in dissertatione
De Transformatione Locorum Geometricorum adjecta Sectionibus Conicis, exhibui necessitatem generalem secundi
illius cruris asymptotici redeuntis ex infinite. Quotiescunque enim curva aliqua saltern algebraica habet asymptoticum
crus aliquod, debet necessario habere y alterum ipsi respondens, y habens pro asymptoto eandem rectam : sed id habere

132

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

133

0

o

•o

m

O

O

\

'34

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

PART II
^Application of the Theory to Mechanics

1 66. I will consider in this second part more especially certain general laws of Consideration of
equilibrium, & motions both of points & masses ; these certainly belong to the science of proceeding w^t'h
Mechanics, & they smooth the path that is most favourable for proving very many of those tne application to
theorems, that are everywhere expounded in the elements of Mechanics, from a single

principle, & in every case by the constant employment of a single method of dealing with
them. But, before I do that, I will call attention to a few points that pertain to the curve
of forces itself, upon which indeed all the phenomena of motions depend.

167. With regard to the curve, there are three points that are especially to be considered ; The points we have
namely, the arcs of the curve, the area included between the axis & the curve swept out regard'tolt.1

by the ordinate by its continuous motion, & those points in which the curve cuts the axis.

1 68. As regards the arcs, some may be called repulsive, & others attractive, according The different kinds
indeed as they lie on the same side of the axis as the asymptotic branch ED or on the opposite totkfarc's may even
side, & terminate ordinates that represent repulsive or attractive forces. The first arc be infinite in num-
ED must certainly be asymptotic on the repulsive side of the axis, & continued indefinitely. r'

The last arc TV, if gravity extends to indefinite distances according to a law of forces in
the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances, must also be asymptotic on the attractive
side of the axis, & by its nature also continued indefinitely. All the remaining arcs are
represented in Fig. I as finite. But a geometrical curve, of the kind that we have expounded,
may also have other asymptotic branches, as many in number as one can wish ; for instance,
suppose the ordinate mn at H to go away to infinity. There are indeed curves, that are
continuous & uniform, which have very many asymptotes, & such curves may even
have an infinite number of asymptotes. («')

169. The intermediate arcs, which wind about the axis, can also, at any point where intermediate arcs,
they reach it, return backwards & touch it ; and they can do this on either side of it ; they

may also be reflected and recede before actual contact, the approach being altered into a
recession, as is to be seen in Fig. i with regard to the arc P^/yR.

170. If universal gravity obeys the law of a force inversely proportional to the square of The ultimate arc

the distance (which, as I remarked in the first part, it only obeys as nearly as possible, but [ tPyeSposs

not exactly), sensibly unchanged only throughout the planetary & cometary system, it will asymptotic,
certainly be the case that the curve of forces will not have the last arm PV asymptotic with
the straight line AC as the asymptote, but will again cut the axis & wind about it. (*) Then

(i) Let, for example, in Fig. 12, CDEFGH &c. be a. continuous cycloid, generated by a point on the circumference
of a circle rolling continuously along the straight line AB ; this by its nature extends on either side to infinity, W thus
meets the base AB in an infinite number of points such as C, E, G, I, &c. // at every point there is drawn an ordinate
such as PQ, and this is produced to R, so that PR is a third proportional to PQ W some given straight line ; then the point
R will trace out a continuous curve consisting of as many branches, MNO, VXY, &c., as there are cycloidal arcs, CDE,
EFG, &c. ; each of these branches will have a pair of asymptotic arms, since the ordinate PQ on approaching any
one of the points C,E,G, &c., will decrease beyond all limits, (3 thus the ordinate PR will increase beyond all limits.
In this curve then there will be CK, EL, GS, &c., all asymptotes parallel to one another & perpendicular to the base
AB ; this is not necessarily the case in other curves, since they may be also inclined to one another in any manner.
Further they will be as many in number as there are points such as C, E, G, &c., that is to say, infinite. Again, in
a similar way, the several intersections of any curves you please with the axis give rise to a pair of asymptotic arms
in curves derived from them according to the same law ; and these arms lie, either on the same side of the axis, as
in this case, where the original curve leaves the axis once more after approaching it, or indeed on opposite sides of the
axis, where the original curve cuts W crosses it. Also, since it is possible for the same curve of higher orders to be
cut in a large number of points, or to be touched, there will possibly be also asymptotic arms in this same continuous
curve equal to any given number you please.

(k) For, from the principle of geometrical continuity itself, which I discussed in my dissertation De Lege Continuitatis
and in the dissertation De Transformatione Locorum Geometricorum appended to my Sectionum Conicarum
Elementa, / showed the necessity for the second asymptotic arm returning from infinity. For as often as an algebraical
curve has at least one asymptotic arm, it must also have another that corresponds to it y has the same straight line

135

136 PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

alios casus innumeros, qui haberi possent, unum censeo speciminis gratia hie non omitten-
dum ; incredibile enim est, quam ferax casuum, quorum singuli sunt notatu dignissimi,
unica etiam hujusmodi curva esse possit.

shnufum curTserte I7I> Si in %• H *n axe C'C sint segmenta AA', A'A" numero quocunque, quorum

Mundoru'm mag- posteriora sint in immensum majora respectu praecedentium, & per singula transeant,
donaikfm propor" asympto-[79]-ti AB, A'B', A"B" perpendiculares axi ; possent inter binas quasque asymptotes
esse curvae ejus formae, quam in fig. I habuimus, & quae exhibetur hie in DEFI &c., D'E'F'F,
&c., in quibus primum crus ED esset asymptoticum repulsivum, postremum SV attractivum,
in singulis vero intervallum EN, quo arcus curvae contorquetur, sit perquam exiguum
respectu intervalli circa S, ubi arcus diutissime perstet proximus hyperbolae habenti
ordinatas in ratione reciproca duplicata distantiarum, turn vero vel immediate abiret
in arcum asymptoticum attractivum, vel iterum contorqueretur utcunque usque ad
ejusmodi asymptoticum attractivum arcum, habente utroque asymptotico arcu aream
infinitam ; in eo casu collocate quocunque punctorum numero inter binas quascunque
asymptotes, vel inter binaria quotlibet, & rite ordinato, posset exurgere quivis, ut ita
dicam, Mundorum numerus, quorum singuli essent inter se simillimi, vel dissimillimi,
prout arcus EF&cN, E'F'&cN' essent inter se similes, vel dissimiles, atque id ita, ut quivis
ex iis nullum haberet commercium cum quovis alio ; cum nimirum nullum punctum
posset egredi ex spatio incluso iis binis arcubus, hinc repulsive, & inde attractive ; & ut
omnes Mundi minorum dimensionum simul sumpti vices agerent unius puncti respectu
proxime majoris, qui constaret ex ejusmodi massulis respectu sui tanquam punctualibus,
dimensione nimirum omni singulorum, respectu ipsius, & respectu distantiarum, ad quas
in illo devenire possint, fere nulla ; unde & illud consequi posset, ut quivis ex ejusmodi
tanquam Mundis nihil ad sensum perturbaretur a motibus, & viribus Mundi illius majoris,
sed dato quovis utcunque magno tempore totus Mundus inferior vires sentiret a quovis
puncto materiae extra ipsum posito accedentes, quantum libuerit, ad aequales, & parallelas
quae idcirco nihil turbarent respectivum ipsius statum internum.

Omissis subiimiori- 172. Sed ea jam pertinent ad applicationem ad Physicam, quae quidem hie innui

areas pr0greSSUS ad tantumm°do, ut pateret, quam multa notatu dignissima considerari ibi possent, & quanta
sit hujusce campi fcecunditas, in quo combinationes possibiles, & possibiles formae sunt
sane infinities infinitae, quarum, quae ab humana mente perspici utcunque possunt, ita
sunt paucae respectu totius, ut haberi possint pro mero nihilo, quas tamen omnes unico
intuitu prsesentes vidit, qui Mundum condidit, DEUS. Nos in iis, quae consequentur,
simpliciora tantummodo qusedam plerumque consectabimur, quae nos ducant ad phaeno-
mena iis conformia, quae in Natura nobis pervia intuemur, & interea progrediemur ad
areas arcubus respondentes.

Cuicunque axis 173. Aream curvae propositae cuicunque, utcunque exiguo, axis segmento respondentem

aream e "respondere Posse esse utcunque magnam, & aream respondentem cuicunque, utcunque magno, [80]

utcunque magnam posse esse utcunque parvam, facile patet. Sit in fig. 15, MQ segmentum axis utcunque

secundjT"1 de^non- parvum, vel magnum ; ac detur area utcunque magna, vel parva. Ea applicata ad MQ

stratio. exhibebit quandam altitudinem MN ita, ut, ducta NR parallela MQ, sit MNRQ aequalis

areae datae, adeoque assumpta QS dupla QR, area trianguli MSQ erit itidem aequalis areae

datae. Jam vero pro secundo casu satis patet, posse curvam transire infra rectam NR,

uti transit XZ, cujus area idcirco esset minor, quam area MNRQ ; nam esset ejus pars.

potest vel ex eadem parte, vel ex opposita ; W crus ipsum jacere potest vel ad easdem plagas partis utriuslibet cum priore
crure, vel ad oppositas, adeoque cruris redeuntis ex infinite poshiones quatuor esse possunt. Si in fig. 13 crus ED abeat
in infinitum, existente asymptoto ACA', potest regredi ex parte A vel ut HI, quod crus facet ad eandem plagam, velut
KL, quod, facet ad oppositam ; y ex parte A', vel ut MN, ex eadem plaga, vel ut OP, ex opposita. In posteriore ex
iis duabus dissertationibus profero exempla omnium ejusmodi regressuum ; ac secundi, ($ quarti casus exempla exhibet
etiam superior genesis, si curva generans contingat axem, vel secet, ulterius progressa respectu ipsius. Inde autem fit, ut
crura asymptotica rectilineam babentia asymptotum esse non possint, nisi numero part, ut & radices imaginarite in
eequationibus algebraicis.

Verum hie in curva virium, in qua arcus semper debet progredi, ut singulis distantiis, sive abscissis, singula vires,
sive ordinatts respondeant, casus primus, & tertius haberi non possunt. Nam ordinata RQ cruris DE occurreret alicubi
in S, S' cruribus etiam HI, MN ,• adeoque relinquentur soli quartus, & secundus, quorum usus erit infra.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

137

o

CD

en,

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

LJ

O \ (0

o

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 139

there is one, out of an innumerable number of other cases that may possibly happen, which
I think for the sake of an example should not be omitted here ; for it is incredible how
prolific in cases, each of which is well worth mentioning, a single curve of this kind can be.

171. If, in Fig. 14, there are any number of segments AA', A'A", of which each that A series of similar
follows is immensely great with regard to the one that precedes it ; & if through each c"rve.s- wlth a s^ies
point there passes an asymptote, such as AB, A'B', A"B", perpendicular to the axis ; then tionai in magnitude,
between any two of these asymptotes there may be curves of the form given in Fig. i.
These are represented in Fig. 14 by DEFI &c., D'E'F'I' &c. ; & in these the first arm E
would be asymptotic & repulsive, & the last SV attractive. In each the interval EN,
where the arc of the curve is winding, is exceedingly small compared with the interval
near S, where the arc for a very long time continues closely approximating to the form
of the hyperbola having its ordinates in the inverse ratio of the squares of the distances ;
& then, either goes off straightway into an asymptotic & attractive arm, or once more
winds about the axis until it becomes an asymptotic attractive arc of this kind, the area
corresponding to either asymptotic arc being infinite. In such a case, if a number of points
are assembled between any pair of asymptotes, or between any number of pairs you please,
£ correctly arranged, there can, so to speak, arise from them any number of universes,
each of them being similar to the other, or dissimilar, according as the arcs EF . . . . N,
E'F' .... N' are similar to one another, or dissimilar ; & this too in such a way that
no one of them has any communication with any other, since indeed no point can possibly
move out of the space included between these two arcs, one repulsive & the other
attractive ; & such that all the universes of smaller dimensions taken together would
act merely as a single point compared with the next greater universe, which would
consist of little point-masses, so to speak, of the same kind compared with itself, that is
to say, every dimension of each of them, compared with that universe & with respect to
the distances to which each can attain within it, would be practically nothing. From
this it would also follow that any one of these universes would not be appreciably influenced
in any way by the motions & forces of that greater universe ; but in any given time,
however great, the whole inferior universe would experience forces, from any point of matter
placed without itself, that approach as near as possible to equal & parallel forces ; these
therefore would have no influence on its relative internal state.

172. Now these matters really belong to the application of the Theory to physics ; & Leaving out more
indeed I only mentioned them here to show how many things there may be well worth abstruse matters,

• j. . -i • • a i .,..,. ' - 9 . n i i r • •• • we pass on to areas.

considering in that section, & how great is the fertility of this field of investigation, m
which possible combinations & possible forms are truly infinitely infinite ; of these, those
that can be in any way comprehended by the human intelligence are so few compared
with the whole, that they can be considered as a mere nothing. Yet all of them were seen
in clear view at one gaze by GOD, the Founder of the World. We, in what follows, will
for the most part investigate only certain of the more simple matters which will lead us
to phenomena in conformity with those things that we contemplate in Nature as far as
our intelligence will carry us ; meanwhile we will proceed to the areas corresponding to
the arcs.

173. It is easily shown that the area corresponding to any segment of the axis, however To any segment of
small, can be anything, no matter how great ; & the area corresponding to any segment, corrt'spo^a'rfy
however great, can be anything, no matter how small. In Fig. 1 5 , let MQ be a segment of the area, however
axis, no matter how small, or great; & let an area be given, no matter how great, or SSi ; proof^the
small. If this area is applied to MQ a certain altitude MN will be given, such that, if NR second part of this
is drawn parallel to MQ, then MNRQ will be equal to the given area ; & thus, if QS is a

taken equal to twice QR, the area of the triangle MSQ will also be equal to the given area.
Now, for the second case it is sufficiently evident that a curve can be drawn below the
straight line NR, in the way XZ is shown, the area under which is less than the area MNRQ ;

as its asymptote ; & this can take place with either the same part of the line or with the other part ; also the arm
itself can lie either on the same side of either of the two parts, or on the opposite side. Thus there may be four positions
of the arm that returns from infinity. If, in Fig. 13, the arm ED goes off to infinity, the asymptote being ACA,
it may return from the direction of A, either like HI, wheie the arm lies on the same side of the asymptote or as KL
which lies 'on the opposite side of it ; or from the direction of A', either as MN, on the same side, or as, DP, on the
opposite side. In the second of these two dissertations, I have given examples of all regressions of this sort ; y the
method of generation given above will yield examples of the second W fourth cases, if the generating curve touches
the axis, or cuts it & passes over beyond it. Further, it thus comes about that asymptotic arms having a rectilinear
asymptote cannot exist except in pairs, just like imaginary roots in algebraical equations.

But here in the curve of forces, in which the arc must always proceed in such a manner that to each distance or
abscissa there corresponds a single force or ordinate, the first £tf third cases cannot occur. For the ordinate RQ of the
arm DE would meet somewhere, in S, S', the branches HI, MN as well. Hence only the fourth & second cases are
left ; W these we will make use of later.

140

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Demonst ratio
primse.

Aream asympto-
ticam posse esse
infinitam, vel fini-
tam magnitudinis
cujuscunque.

Areas exprimere
incrementa, vel
decrementa quad-
ati velocitatis.

Quin immo licet ordinata QV sit utcunque magna ; facile patet, posse arcum MaV ita
accedere ad rectas MQ, QV ; ut area inclusa iis rectis, & ipsa curva, minuatur infra
quoscunque determinatos limites. Potest enim jacere totus arcus intra duo triangula
QaM, QaV, quorum altitudines cum minui possint,
quantum libuerit, stantibus basibus MQ, QV, potest
utique area ultra quoscunque limites imminui. Pos-
set autem ea area esse minor quacunque data ;
etiamsi QV esset asymptotus, qua de re paullo
inferius.

174. Pro primo autem casu vel curva secet axem
extra MQ, ut in T, vel in altero extremo, ut in M ;
fieri poterit, ut ejus arcus TV, vel MV transeat per
aliquod punctum V jacens ultra S, vel etiam per
ipsum S ita, ut curvatura ilium ferat, quemad-
modum figura exhibet, extra triangulum MSQ, quo
casu patet, aream curvae respondentem intervallo MQ
fore majorem, quam sit area trianguli MSQ, adeoque
quam sit area data ; erit enim ejus trianguli area
pars areae pertinentis ad curvam. Quod si curva
etiam secaret alicubi axem, ut in H inter M, & Q,
turn vero fieri posset, ut area respondens alteri e
segmentis MH, QH esset major, quam area data .

simul, & area alia assumpta, qua area assumpta esset minor area respondens segmento,
alteri adeoque excessus prioris supra posteriorem remaneret major, quam area data.

175. Area asymptotica clausa inter asymptotum, & ordinatam quamvis, ut in fig. I
BA#g, potest esse vel infinita, vel finita magnitudinis cujusvis ingentis, vel exiguae. Id
quidem etiam geometrice demonstrari potest, sed multo facilius demonstratur calculo
integrali admodum elementari ; & in Geometriae sublimioris elementis habentur theoremata,
ex quibus id admodum facile deducitur 0. Generaliter nimi-[8l]-rum area ejusmodi
est infinita ; si ordinata crescit in ratione reciproca abscissarum simplici, aut majore : &
est finita ; si crescit in ratione multiplicata minus, quam per unitatem.

176. Hoc, quod de areis dictum est, necessarium fuit ad applicationem ad Mechanicam,
ut nimirum habeatur scala quaedam velocitatum, quae in accessu puncti cujusvis ad aliud
punctum, vel recessu generantur, vel eliduntur ; prout ejus motus conspiret directione vis,
vel sit ipsi contrarius. Nam, quod innuimus & supra in adnot. (/) ad num. 118., ubi vires
exprimuntur per ordinatas, & spatia per abscissas, area, quam texit ordinata, exprimit
incrementum, vel decrementum quadrati velocitatis, quod itidem ope Geometrise demon-
stratur facile, & demonstravi tam in dissertatione De Firibus Vivis, quam in Stayanis
Supplements ; sed multo facilius res conficitur ope calculi integralis. («)

M H

FIG. 15.

(1) Sit Aa in Fig. I =x, ag=y ; ac sit #"y = I ; erit y = *-">/", y dx elementum areee=x~m/*dx, cujus integrate

— *fn» + A, addita constanti A, sive ob x~*>">=y, habebitur —?—xy + A. Quoniam incipit area in A, in
n~m " n-m

origine abscissarum ; si n—m fuerit numerus positivus, adeoque n major, quam m ; area erit finita, ac valor A =o;
area vero erit ad rectangulum AaXag, ut in ad n — m, quod rectangulum, cum ag possit esse magna, & parva, ut libuerit,
potest esse magnitudinis cujusvis. Is valor fit infinitus, si facto m =n, divisor evaaat—Q; adeoque multo magis fit
infinitus valor area, si m sit major, quam n. Unde constat, aream fore infiniiam, quotiescunque ordinatte crescent in
ratione reciproca simplici, y majore ; secus fore finitam.

(m) Sit u vis, c celeritas, t tempus, s spatium : erit u at = dc, cum celeritatis incrementum sit proportionale vi, W
tempusculo ; ac erit c dt = ds, cum spatiolum confectwm respondeat velocitati, & tempusculo. Hinc eruitur dt =— ,

W pariter dt =—, adeoque—- =— W c dc = u ds. Porro 2c dc est incrementum quadrati vekcitatis cc, i3 u ds

c u c

in bypotbesi, quod ordinata sit w, & spatium s sit abscissa, est areola respondens spatiolo ds confecto. Igitur incrementum
quadrati velocitatis conspirante vi, adeoque decrementum vi contraria, respondet arete respondent spatiolo percurso quovis
infinitesimo tempusculo ; & proinde tempore etiam quovis finito incrementum, vel decrementum quadrati velocitatis
respondet arece pertinenti ad partem axis referentem spatium percursum.

Hinc autem illud sponte consequitur : si per aliquod spatium vires in singulis punctis eeedem permaneant, mobile autem
adveniat cum velocitate quavis ad ejus initium ; diferentiam quadrati velocitatis finalis a quadrate velocitatis initialis
fore semper eandem, quts idcirco erit tola velocitas finalis in casu, in quo mobile initio illius spatii haberet velocitatem
nullam. Quare, quod nobis erit inferius usui, quadratum velocitatis finalis, conspirante vi cum directione motus, tzquabitur
binis quadratis binarum velocitatum, ejus, quam babuit initio, W ejus,.quam acquisivisset in fine, si initio ingressum fuisset
sine ulla velocitate.

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

141

for it is part of it. Again, although the ordinate QV may be of any size, however great,
it is easily shown that an arc MoV can approach so closely to the straight lines MQ,
QV that the area included between these lines & the curve shall be diminished beyond
any limits whatever. For it is possible for the curve to lie within the two triangles QaM,
QaV ; & since the altitudes of these can be diminished as much as you please, whilst the
bases MQ, QV remain the same, therefore the area can indeed be diminished beyond all
limits whatever. Moreover it is possible for this area to be less than any given area, even
although QV should be an asymptote ; we will consider this a little further on.

174. Again, for the first case, either the curve will cut the axis beyond MQ, as at T,
or at either end, as at M. Then it is possible for it to happen that an arc of it, TV or MV,
will pass through some point V lying beyond S, or even through S itself, in such a way
that its curvature will carry it, as shown in the diagram, outside the triangle MSQ ; in
this case it is clear that the area of the curve corresponding to the interval MQ will be
greater than the area of the triangle MSQ, & therefore greater than the given area,
for the area of this triangle is part of the area belonging to the curve. But if the curve
should even cut the axis anywhere, as at H, between M & Q, then it would be possible
for it to come about that the area corresponding to one of the two segments MH, QH would
be greater than the given area together with some other assumed area ; & that the area
corresponding to the other segment should be less than this assumed area ; and thus the
excess of the former over the latter would remain greater than the given area.

175. An asymptotic area, bounded by an asymptote & any ordinate, like BAag in
Fig. i, can be either infinite, or finite of any magnitude either very great or very small.
This can indeed be also proved geometrically, but it can be demonstrated much more
easily by an application of the integral calculus that is quite elementary ; & in the elements
of higher geometry theorems are obtained from which it is derived quite easily. 0 In
general, it is true, an area of this kind is infinite ; namely when the ordinate increases in
the simple inverse ratio of the abscissse, or in a greater ratio ; and it is finite, if it increases
in this ratio multiplied by something less than unity.

176. What has been said with regard to areas was a necessary preliminary to the
application of the Theory to Mechanics ; that is to say, in order that we might obtain a
diagrammatic representation of the velocities, which, on the approach of any point to
another point, or on recession from it, are produced or destroyed, according as its motion
is in the same direction as the direction of the force, or in the opposite direction. For,
as we also remarked above, in note (/) to Art. 118, when the forces are represented by
ordinates & the distances by abscissae, the area that the ordinate sweeps out represents
the increment or decrement of the square of the velocity. This can also be easily proved
by the help of geometry ; & I gave the proof both in the dissertation De Firibus Fivis
& in the Supplements to Stay's Philosophy ; but the matter is much more easily made
out by the aid of the integral calculus. («)

Proof
part.

of the first

An a s y m p totic
area may be either
infinite or equal to
any finite area
whatever.

The areas represent
the increments or
decrements of the
square of the velo-
city.

(1) In Fig. iletAa = x,ag = y; y let xmy" = I. Then will y — x~

the element of area y dx = x~m/*

dx : the integral of this is - x <»-"»/"+ A, where a constant A is added ; or, since x~m/*=y, we shall have-^— Xv + A

n-m n-m '

Now, since the area is initially A, at the origin of the abscissa, if n-m happened to be a positive number, y
thus n greater than m, then the area will be finite, y the value of A will be = o. Also the area will be to
the rectangle Aa.ag as n is to n-m ; y this rectangle, since ag can be either great or small, as you please, may be
of any magnitude whatever. The value is infinite, if by making m equal to n the divisor becomes equal to zero ; &
thus the value of the area becomes all the more infinite, if m is greater than n. Hence it follows that the area will
be infinite, whenever the ordinates increase in a simple inverse ratio, or in a greater ratio ; otherwise it will be finite.

(m) Let u be the force, c the velocity, t the time, y s the distance. Then will u dt — dc, since the increment
of the velocity is proportional to the force, y to the small interval of time. Also c dt = ds, since the distance traversed
corresponds with the velocity W the small interval of time. Hence it follows that dt = dc/u, y similarly dt — ds/c,
y therefore dc/u = ds/c, & c dc — u ds. Further, ^c dc is the increment of the square of the velocity c', y u ds,
on the hypothesis that the ordinate represents u, y the abscissa the distance s, is the small area corresponding to the
small distance traversed. Hence the increment of the square of the velocity, when in the direction of the force, y
the decrement when opposite in direction to the force, is represented by the area corresponding to ds, the small distance
traversed in any infinitely short time. Hence also, in any finite interval of time, the increment or decrement of the
square of the velocity will be represented by the area corresponding to that part of the axis which represents the distance
traversed.

Hence also it follows immediately that, if through any distance the force on each of the points remains as before,
but the moving body arrives at the beginning of it with any velocity, then the difference between the square of the final
velocity y the square of the initial velocity will always be the same ; y this therefore will be the total final velocity,
in the case where the moving body had no velocity at the beginning of the distance. Hence, the square of the final
velocity, when the motion is in the same direction as the force, will be equal to the sum of the squares of the velocity which
it had at the beginning y of the velocity it would have acquired at the end, if it had at the beginning started without
any velocity ; a theorem that we shall make use of later.

I42

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

Atque id ips u m,
licet segmenta axis
sint dimidia spatio-
rum percursorum a
singulis punctis.

Si arese sint partim
attractivae, partim
repulsivae, assumen-
dam esse differen-
tiam earundem.

177. Duo tamen hie tantummodo notanda sunt ; primo quidem illud : si duo
puncta ad se invicem accedant, vel a se invicem recedant in ea recta, quae ipsa conjungit,
segmenta illius [82] axis, qui exprimit distantias, non expriment spatium confectum ; nam
moveri debebit punctum utrumque : adhuc tamen ilia segmenta erunt proportionalia ipsi
spatio confecto, eorum nimirum dimidio ; quod quidem satis est ad hoc, ut illae areae adhuc
sint proportionales incrementis, vel decrementis quadrati velocitatum, adeoque ipsa
exprimant.

178. Secundo loco notandum illud, ubi areae respondentes dato cuipiam spatio sint
partim attractive, partim repulsivae, earum differentiam, quae oritur subtrahendo summam
omnium repulsivarum a summa attractivarum, vel vice versa, exhibituram incrementum
illud, vel decrementum quadrati velocitatis ; prout directio motus respectivi conspiret
cum vi, vel oppositam habeat directionem. Quamobrem si interea, dum per aliquod majus
intervallum a se invicem recesserunt puncta, habuerint vires directionis utriusque ; ut
innotescat, an celeritas creverit, an decreverit & quantum ; erit investigandum, an areas
omnes attractivae simul, omnes repulsivas simul superent, an deficiant, & quantum ; inde
enim, & a velocitate, quae habebatur initio, erui poterit quod quaeritur.

^e arcubus, & areis ; nunc aliquanto diligentius considerabimus
tangentis: sectio- ilia axis puncta, ad quae curva appellit. Ea puncta vel sunt ejusmodi, ut in iis curva axem
ducT enera UmltUm secet> cujusmodi in fig. I sunt E,G,I, &c., vel ejusmodi, ut in iis ipsa curva axem contingat
tantummodo. Primi generis puncta sunt ea, in quibus fit transitus a repulsionibus ad
attractiones, vel vice versa, & hsec ego appello limites, quod nimirum sint inter eas opposi-
tarum directionum vires. Sunt autem hi limites duplicis generis : in aliis, aucta distantia,
transitur a repulsione ad attractionem : in aliis contra ab attractione ad repulsionem.
Prioris generis sunt E,I,N,R ; posterioris G,L,P : & quoniam, posteaquam ex parte
repulsiva in una sectione curva transiit ad partem attractivam ; in proxime sequent! sectione
debet necessario ex parte attractiva transire ad repulsivam, ac vice versa ; patet, limites
fore alternatim prioris illius, & hujus posterioris generis.

t P°rro linrites prioris generis, a limitibus posterioris ingens habent inter se dis-
differant': limites crimen. Habent illi quidem hoc commune, ut duo puncta collocata in distantia unius
cohaesionls' & n°n h'111^8 cujuscunque nullam habeant mutuam vim, adeoque si respective quiescebant, pergant
itidem respective quiescere. At si ab ilia respectiva quiete dimoveantur ; turn vero in
limite primi generis ulteriori dimotioni resistent, & conabuntur priorem distantiam recu-
perare, ac sibi relicta ad illam ibunt ; in limite vero secundi generis, utcunque parum
dimota, sponte magis fugient, ac a priore distantia statim recedent adhuc magis. Nam
si distantia minuatur ; habebunt in limite prioris generis vim repulsivam, quae obstabit
uteriori accessui, & urgebit puncta ad mutuum recessum, quern sibi relicta acquirent, [83]
adeoque tendent ad illam priorem distantiam : at in limite secundi generis habebunt
attractionem, qua adhuc magis ad se accedent, adeoque ab ilia priore distantia, quae erat
major, adhuc magis sponte fugient. Pariter si distantia augeatur, in primo limitum genere
a vi attractiva, quse habetur statim in distantia majore ; habebitur resistentia ad ulteriorem
recessum, & conatus ad minuendam distantiam, ad quam recuperandam sibi relicta tendent
per accessum ; at in limitibus secundi generis orietur repulsio, qua sponte se magis adhuc
fugient, adeoque a minore ilia priore distantia sponte magis recedent. Hinc illos prioris
generis limites, qui mutuse positionis tenaces sunt, ego quidem appellavi limites coh&sionis,
& secundi generis limites appellavi limites non cobasionis.

Duo genera
tactuum.

181. Ilia puncta, in quibus curva axem tangit, sunt quidem terminus quidam virium,
quae ex utraque parte, dum ad ea acceditur, decrescunt ultra quoscunque limites, ac demum
ibidem evanescunt ; sed in iis non transitur ab una virium directione ad aliam. Si con-
tactus fiat ab arcu repulsive ; repulsiones evanescunt, sed post contactum remanent itidem
repulsiones ; ac si ab arcu attractive, attractionibus evanescentibus attractiones iterum
immediate succedunt. Duo puncta collocata in ejusmodi distantia respective quiescunt ;

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY

'43

177. However, there are here two things that want noting only. The first of them The same result
is this, that if two points approach one another or recede from one another in the straight holds good even

,...., , r i •,. , ,. i ° when the segments

line joining them, the segments of the axis, which expresses distances, do not represent of the axis are the
the distances traversed ; for both points will have to move. Nevertheless the segments 'ialves of the dis-

•11 -11 i • i i T i i i if f • i . . i •, tances traversed by

will still be proportional to the distance traversed, namely, the half of it ; & this indeed is single points,
sufficient for the areas to be still proportional to the increments or decrements of the
squares of the velocities, & thus to represent them.

178. In the second place it is to be noted that, where the areas corresponding to any if the areas are
given interval are partly attractive & partly repulsive, their difference, obtained by p^ti*tt2SS2 &
subtracting the sum of all those that are repulsive from the sum of those that are attractive, their difference
or vice versa, will represent the increment, or the decrement, of the square of the velocity, must be taken-
according as the direction of relative motion is in the same direction as the force, or in

the opposite direction. Hence, if, during the time that the points have receded from
one another by some considerable interval, they had forces in each direction ; then
in order to ascertain whether the velocity had been increased or decreased, & by how
much, it will have to be considered whether all the attractive areas taken together are
greater or less than all the repulsive areas taken together, & by how much. For from this,
& from the velocity which initially existed, it will be possible to deduce what is required.

179. So much for the arcs & the areas; now we must consider in a rather more careful Approach of the
manner those points of the axis to which the curve approaches. These points are either ^en it cSa^or
such that the curve cuts the axis in them, for instance, the points E, G, I, &c. in Fig. I : touches it; two
or such that the curve only touches the axis at the points. Points of the first kind are u^ns^/'ihnit-
those in which there is a transition from repulsions to attractions, or vice-versa ; & these points.

I call limit-points or boundaries, since indeed they are boundaries between the forces acting
in opposite directions. Moreover these limit-points are twofold in kind ; in some, when
the distance is increased, there is a transition from repulsion to attraction ; in others, on
the contrary, there is a transition from attraction to repulsion. The points E, I, N, R
are of the first kind, and G, L, P are of the second kind. Now, since at one intersection,
the curve passes from the repulsive part to the attractive part, at the next following
intersection it is bound to pass from the attractive to the repulsive part, & vice versa.
It is clear then that the limit-points will be alternately of the first & second kinds.

1 80. Further, there is a distinction between limit-points of the first & those of the in what they agree
second kind. The former kind have this property in common ; namely that, if two points *iffj£ . w^ u*?ty
are situated at a distance from one another equal to the distance of any one of these limit- points of cohesion
points from the origin, they will have no mutual force ; & thus, if they are relatively & of non-cohesic«i.
at rest with regard to one another, they will continue to be relatively at rest. Also, if

they are moved apart from this position of relative rest, then, for a limit-point of the first
kind, they will resist further separation & will strive to recover the original distance, &
will attain to it if left to themselves ; but, in a limit-point of the second kind, however
small the separation, they will of themselves seek to get away from one another & will
immediately depart from the original distance still more. For, if the distance is diminished,
they will have, in a limit-point of the first kind, a repulsive force, which will impede further
approach & impel the points to mutual recession, & this they will acquire if left to
themselves ; thus they will endeavour to maintain the original distance apart. But in a
limit-point of the second kind they will have an attraction, on account of which they will
approach one another still more ; & thus they will seek to depart still further from the
original distance, which was a greater one. Similarly, if the distance is increased, in
limit-points of the first kind, due to the attractive force which is immediately obtained
at this greater distance, there will be a resistance to further recession, & an endeavour
to diminish the distance ; & they will seek to recover the original distance if left to
themselves by approaching one another. But, in limit-points of the second class, a repulsion
is produced, owing to which they try to get away from one another still further ; & thus
of themselves they will depart still more from the original distance, which was less. On
this account indeed I have called those limit-points of the first kind, which are tenacious
of mutual position, limit-points of cohesion, & I have termed limit-points of the second
kind limit-points of non-cohesion.

181. Those points in which the curve touches the axis are indeed end-terms of series Two kinds of con-
of forces, which decrease on both sides, as approach to these points takes place, beyond tactt

all limits, & at length vanish there ; but with such points there is no transition from
one direction of the forces to the other. If contact takes place with a repulsive arc, the
repulsion vanishes, but after contact remains still a repulsion. If it takes place with an
attractive arc, attraction follows on immediately after a vanishing attraction. Two points
situated such a distance remain in a state of relative rest ; but in the first case they will

144

PHILOSOPHIC NATURALIS THEORIA

pro forma curvae
prope sectionem.

sed in prime casu resistunt soli compressioni, non etiam distractioni, £ in secundo resistunt
huic soli, non illi.

l^2' Limites cohsesionis possunt esse validissimi, & languidissimi. Si curva ibi quasi
ad pcrpendiculum secat axem, & ab eo longissime recedit ; sunt validissimi : si autem
ipSum secet in angulo perquam exiguo, & parum ab ipso recedat ; erunt languidissimi.
Primum genus limitum cohsesionis exhibet in fig. I arcus tNy, secundum cNx. In illo
assumptis in axe Nz, NM utcunque exiguis, possunt vires zt, uy, & areae Nzt, Nwy esse
utcumque magnas, adeoque, mutatis utcunque parum distantiis, possunt haberi vires ab
ordinatis expressae utcunque magnae, quae vi comprimenti, vel distrahenti, quantum libuerit,
valide resistant, vel areae utcunque magnae, quae velocitates quantumlibet magnas
respectivas elidant, adeoque sensibilis mutatio positionis mutuae impediri potest contra
utcunque magnam vel vim prementem, vel celeritatem ab aliorum punctorum actionibus
impressam. In hoc secundo genere limitum cohaesionis, assumptis etiam majoribus
segmentis Nz, Nw, possunt & vires zc,ux, & areae Nzf , N«tf, esse quantum libuerit exiguae,
& idcirco exigua itidem, quantum libuerit, resistentia, quae mutationem vetet.

P°ssunt autem hi Hmites esse quocunque, utcunque magno numero ; cum
ro, utcunque proxi- demonstratum sit, posse curvam in quotcunque, & quibuscunque punctis axem secare.
mos, vel remotes possunt idcirco etiam esse utcunque inter se proximi, vel remoti, ut [84] alicubi intervallum
originis' abscissa- inter duos proximos limites sit etiam in quacunque ratione majus, quam sit distantia
ordme praecedentis ab origine abscissarum A ; alibi in intervallo vel exiguo, vel ingenti sint quam-
plurimi inter se ita proximi, ut a se invicem distent minus, quam pro quovis assumpto,
aut dato intervallo. Id evidenter fluit ex eo ipso, quod possint sectiones curvae cum axe
haberi quotcunque, & ubicunque. Sed ex eo, quod arcus curvae ubicunque possint habere
positiones quascunque, cum ad datas curvas accedere possint, quantum libuerit, sequitur,
quod limites ipsi cohaesionis possint alii aliis esse utcunque validiores, vel languidiores,
atque id quocunque ordine, vel sine ordine ullo ; ut nimirum etiam sint in minoribus
distantiis alicubi limites validissimi, turn in majoribus languidiores, deinde itidem in
majoribus multo validiores, & ita porro ; cum nimirum nullus sit nexus necessarius inter
distantiam limitis ab origine abscissarum, & ejus validitatem pendentem ab inclinatione,
& recessu arcus secantis respectu axis, quod probe notandum est, futurum nimirum usui
ad ostendendum, tenacitatem, sive cohaesionem, a densitate non pendere.

similes.

Quse positio rectae jg^.. In utroque limitum genere fieri potest, ut curva in ipso occursu cum axe pro

infinite3 rarissima! tangente habeat axem ipsum, ut habeat ordinatam, ut aliam rectam aliquam inclinatam.
quae frequentissima. Jn primo casu maxime ad axem accedit, & initio saltern languidissimus est limes ; in secundo
maxime recedit, & initio saltern est validissimus ; sed hi casus debent esse rarissimi, si
uspiam sunt : nam cum ibi debeat & axem secare curva, & progredi, adeoque secari in
puncto eodem ab ordinata producta, debebit habere flexum contrarium, sive mutare
directionem flexus, quod utique fit, ubi curva & rectam tangit simul, & secat. Rarissimos
tamen debere esse ibi hos flexus, vel potius nullos, constat ex eo, quod flexus contrarii puncta
in quovis finito arcu datae curvae cujusvis numero finite esse debent, ut in Theoria curvarum
demonstrari potest, & alia puncta sunt infinita numero, adeoque ilia cadere in intersectiones
est infinities improbabilius. Possunt tamen saepe cadere prope limites : nam in singulis
contorsionibus curvae saltern singuli flexus contrarii esse debent. Porro quamcunque
directionem habuerit tangens, si accipiatur exiguus arcus hinc, & inde a limite, vel
maxime accedet ad rectam, vel habebit curvaturam ad sensum aequalem, & ad sensum
aequali lege progredientem utrinque, adeoque vires in aequali distantia exigua a limite
erunt ad sensum hinc, & inde aequales ; sed distantiis auctis poterunt & diu aequalitatem
retinere, & cito etiam ab ea recedere.

Transitus per infi- 185. Hi quidem sunt limites per intersectionem curvae cum axe, viribus evanescentibus

astlm"toticisribUS m *PSO limite- At possunt [85] esse alii limites, ac transitus ab una directione virium ad

aliam non per evanescentiam, sed per vires auctas in infinitum, nimirum per asymptoticos

A THEORY OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHY 145

resist compression only, & not separation ; and in the second case the latter only, but not
the former.

182. Limit-points may be either very strong or very weak. If the curve cuts the axis The limit-points of
at the point almost at right angles, & goes off to a considerable distance from it, they o°h^eak ?ccord£f
are very strong. But if it cuts the axis at a very small angle & recedes from it but little, to the form of the
then they will be very weak. The arc *Ny in Fig. i represents the first kind of limit- ^Hint * iVater-
points of cohesion, and the arc cNx the second kind. At the point N, if Nz, N« are section.

taken along the axis, no matter how small, the forces zt, uy, & the areas Nzt, N«y may
be of any size whatever ; & thus, if the distances are changed ever so little, it is possible
that there will be forces represented by ordinates ever so great ; & these will strongly
resist the compressing or separating force, be it as great as you please ; also that we shall
have areas, ever so large, that will destroy the relative velocities, no matter how great they
may be. Thus, a sensible change of relative position will be hindered in opposition to
any impressed force, however great, or against a velocity generated by the actions upon
them of other points. In the second kind of limit-points of cohesion, if also segments Nz,
Nw are taken of considerable size even, then it is possible for both the forces zc, ux, &
the areas Nzc, Nux to be as small as you please ; & therefore also the resistance that
opposes the change will be as small as you please.

183. Moreover, there can be any number of these limit-points, no matter how great ; The limit-points
for it has been proved that the curve can cut the axis in any numb